Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from Breast Cancer Research and BioMed Central.

Open Access Highly Accessed Research article

Modelling the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening in women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom

Necdet B Gunsoy1*, Montserrat Garcia-Closas12 and Sue M Moss3

Author Affiliations

1 Division of Genetics and Epidemiology, Institute of Cancer Research, 15 Cotswold Road, Sutton, SM2 5NG, UK

2 Breakthrough Breast Cancer Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, 237 Fulham Road, London, SW3 6JB, UK

3 Centre for Cancer Prevention, Queen Mary University of London, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ, UK

For all author emails, please log on.

Breast Cancer Research 2012, 14:R152  doi:10.1186/bcr3365

Published: 29 November 2012

Abstract

Introduction

Overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening, defined as the diagnosis of screen-detected cancers that would not have presented clinically in a women's lifetime in the absence of screening, has emerged as a highly contentious issue, as harm caused may question the benefit of mammographic screening. Most studies included women over 50 years old and little information is available for younger women.

Methods

We estimated the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to screening in women aged 40 to 49 years using data from a randomised trial of annual mammographic screening starting at age 40 conducted in the UK. A six-state Markov model was constructed to estimate the sensitivity of mammography for invasive and in situ breast cancer and the screen-detectable mean sojourn time for non-progressive in situ, progressive in situ, and invasive breast cancer. Then, a 10-state simulation model of cancer progression, screening, and death, was developed to estimate overdiagnosis attributable to screening.

Results

The sensitivity of mammography for invasive and in situ breast cancers was 90% (95% CI, 72 to 99) and 82% (43 to 99), respectively. The screen-detectable mean sojourn time of preclinical non-progressive and progressive in situ cancers was 1.3 (0.4 to 3.4) and 0.11 (0.05 to 0.19) years, respectively, and 0.8 years (0.6 to 1.2) for preclinical invasive breast cancer. The proportion of screen-detected in situ cancers that were non-progressive was 55% (25 to 77) for the first and 40% (22 to 60) for subsequent screens. In our main analysis, overdiagnosis was estimated as 0.7% of screen-detected cancers. A sensitivity analysis, covering a wide range of alternative scenarios, yielded a range of 0.5% to 2.9%.

Conclusion

Although a high proportion of screen-detected in situ cancers were non-progressive, a majority of these would have presented clinically in the absence of screening. The extent of overdiagnosis due to screening in women aged 40 to 49 was small. Results also suggest annual screening is most suitable for women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom due to short cancer sojourn times.