A comparative analysis of risk factor associations with interval and screen-detected breast cancers: A large UK prospective study.

The associations of certain factors, such as age and menopausal hormone therapy, with breast cancer risk are known to differ for interval and screen-detected cancers. However, the extent to which associations of other established breast cancer risk factors differ by mode of detection is unclear. We investigated associations of a wide range of risk factors using data from a large UK cohort with linkage to the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, cancer registration, and other health records. We used Cox regression to estimate adjusted relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between risk factors and breast cancer risk. A total of 9421 screen-detected and 5166 interval cancers were diagnosed in 517,555 women who were followed for an average of 9.72 years. We observed the following differences in risk factor associations by mode of detection: greater body mass index (BMI) was associated with a smaller increased risk of interval (RR per 5 unit increase 1.07, 95% CI 1.03-1.11) than screen-detected cancer (RR 1.27, 1.23-1.30); having a first-degree family history was associated with a greater increased risk of interval (RR 1.81, 1.68-1.95) than screen-detected cancer (RR 1.52, 1.43-1.61); and having had previous breast surgery was associated with a greater increased risk of interval (RR 1.85, 1.72-1.99) than screen-detected cancer (RR 1.34, 1.26-1.42). As these differences in associations were relatively unchanged after adjustment for tumour grade, and are in line with the effects of these factors on mammographic density, they are likely to reflect the effects of these risk factors on screening sensitivity.

Contrast-Enhanced Mammography in Local Staging of Screen-Detected Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: BreastScreen Australia, the population mammographic screening program for breast cancer, uses two-view digital screening mammography ± ultrasound followed by percutaneous biopsy to detect breast cancer. Secondary breast imaging for further local staging, not performed at BreastScreen, may identify additional clinically significant breast lesions. Staging options include further mammography, bilateral ultrasound, and/or contrast-based imaging (CBI) [magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM)]. CBI for local staging of screen-detected cancer was introduced at an academic hospital breast service in Melbourne, VIC, Australia. We report findings for otherwise occult disease and resulting treatment changes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients staged using CEM between November 2018 and April 2022 were identified from hospital records. Data were extracted from radiology, pathology, and breast unit databases. CEM-detected abnormalities were documented as true positive (TP) for invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), or otherwise false positive (FP). The impact on surgical decisions was assessed. RESULTS: Of 202 patients aged 44-84 years, 60 (30%) had 74 additional findings [34 (46%) TP, 40 (54%) FP]. These were malignant in 29/202 (14%) patients (79% invasive cancers, 21% DCIS). CEM resulted in surgical changes in 43/202 (21%) patients: wider resection (24/43), conversion to mastectomy (6/43), contralateral breast surgery (6/43), additional ipsilateral excision (5/43), and bracketing (2/43). Additional findings were more common for patients with larger index lesions and for invasive cancer, but there was no significant variation by age, breast density, or index lesion grade. CONCLUSIONS: CEM for local staging of screen-detected breast cancers identified occult malignancy in 14% of patients. CEM improves local staging and may facilitate appropriate management of screen-detected breast cancers.

Long-term survival of screen-detected synchronous and metachronous bilateral non-palpable breast cancer among Chinese women: a hospital-based study (2003-2017).

PURPOSE: Screen-detected unilateral non-palpable breast cancer (NPBC) shows favorable prognosis, whereas bilateral breast cancer (BBC), especially synchronous BBC (SBBC) manifests worse survival than unilateral breast cancer (BC). It remains unclear whether screen-detected bilateral NPBC has compromised survival and requires intensified treatment or favorable prognosis and needs de-escalating therapy. METHODS: From 2003 to 2017, 1,075 consecutive NPBC patients were retrospectively reviewed. There were 988 patients with unilateral NPBC (UniNPBC), and 87 patients with ipsilateral NPBC + any contralateral BC [(N + AnyContra) PBC], including 32 patients with bilateral NPBC (BiNPBC) and 55 patients with ipsilateral NPBC + contralateral palpable cancer [(N + Contra) PBC]. Median follow-up time was 91 (48-227) months. Clinicopathological characteristics were compared between UniNPBC and BBC, whereas relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) among BBC subgroups. RFS and OS factors of BBC were identified. RESULTS: Compared to UniNPBC, patients with screen-detected bilateral BC had more invasive (85.1%, 74.8%), ER negative (26.4%, 17.1%), PR negative (36.8%, 23.5%), triple-negative (21.6%, 8.5%) BC as well as less breast conserving surgery (17.2%, 32.4%), radiotherapy (13.8%, 32.0%) and endocrine therapy (71.3%, 83.9%). 10 year RFS and OS rates of (N + AnyContra) PBC (72.8%, 81.5%), (N + Contra) PBC (60.6%, 73.9%), and synchronous (N + Contra) PBC (58.1%, 70.1%) were significantly compromised compared to UniNPBC (91.0%, 97.2%). RFS factors of BBC included pN3 (p = 0.048), lymphovascular invasion (p = 0.008) and existence of contralateral palpable interval BC (p = 0.008), while the OS relevant factor was pN3 (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Screen-detected bilateral NPBC including SynBiNPBC and MetaBiNPBC showed good prognosis as UniNPBC so that the therapy of BiNPBC could be de-escalated and optimized according to UniNPBC. Contrarily, screen-detected ipsilateral NPBC with contralateral palpable BC [(N + Contra) PBC] manifested unfavorable survival worse than UniNPBC and synchronous (N + Contra) PBC had the worst survival among all subgroups, implying that these were actually bilateral interval BC and required intensified treatment.

Novel mammogram-based measures improve breast cancer risk prediction beyond an established mammographic density measure.

Mammograms contain information that predicts breast cancer risk. We developed two novel mammogram-based breast cancer risk measures based on image brightness (Cirrocumulus) and texture (Cirrus). Their risk prediction when fitted together, and with an established measure of conventional mammographic density (Cumulus), is not known. We used three studies consisting of: 168 interval cases and 498 matched controls; 422 screen-detected cases and 1197 matched controls; and 354 younger-diagnosis cases and 944 controls frequency-matched for age at mammogram. We conducted conditional and unconditional logistic regression analyses of individually- and frequency-matched studies, respectively. We estimated measure-specific risk gradients as the change in odds per standard deviation of controls after adjusting for age and body mass index (OPERA) and calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). For interval, screen-detected and younger-diagnosis cancer risks, the best fitting models (OPERAs [95% confidence intervals]) involved: Cumulus (1.81 [1.41-2.31]) and Cirrus (1.72 [1.38-2.14]); Cirrus (1.49 [1.32-1.67]) and Cirrocumulus (1.16 [1.03 to 1.31]); and Cirrus (1.70 [1.48 to 1.94]) and Cirrocumulus (1.46 [1.27-1.68]), respectively. The AUCs were: 0.73 [0.68-0.77], 0.63 [0.60-0.66], and 0.72 [0.69-0.75], respectively. Combined, our new mammogram-based measures have twice the risk gradient for screen-detected and younger-diagnosis breast cancer (P ≤ 10-12 ), have at least the same discriminatory power as the current polygenic risk score, and are more correlated with causal factors than conventional mammographic density. Discovering more information about breast cancer risk from mammograms could help enable risk-based personalised breast screening.

Combining method of detection and 70-gene signature for enhanced prognostication of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Studies have shown that screen detection by national screening programs is independently associated with better prognosis of breast cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the association between tumor biology according to the 70-gene signature (70-GS) and survival of patients with screen-detected and interval breast cancers. METHODS: All Dutch breast cancer patients enrolled in the MINDACT trial (EORTC-10041/BIG3-04) accrued 2007-2011, who participated in the national screening program (biennial screening, ages 50-75) were included (n = 1102). Distant Metastasis-Free Interval (DMFI) was evaluated according to the 70-GS for patients with screen-detected (n = 754) and interval cancers (n = 348). RESULTS: Patients with screen-detected cancers had 8-year DMFI rates of 98.2% for 70-GS ultralow-, 94.6% for low-, and 93.8% for high-risk tumors (p = 0.4). For interval cancers, there was a significantly lower 8-year DMFI rate for patients with 70-GS high-risk tumors (85.2%) compared to low- (92.2%) and ultralow-risk tumors (97.4%, p = 0.0023). Among patients with 70-GS high-risk tumors, a significant difference in 8-year DMFI rate was observed between interval (85.2%, n = 166) versus screen-detected cancers (93.8%, n = 238; p = 0.002) with a HR of 2.3 (95%CI 1.2-4.4, p = 0.010) adjusted for clinical-pathological characteristics and adjuvant systemic treatment. CONCLUSION: Among patients with 70-GS high-risk tumors, a significant difference in DMFI was observed between screen-detected and interval cancers, suggesting that method of detection is an additional prognostic factor in this subgroup and should be taken into account when deciding on adjuvant treatment strategies.

Effects of the Norfolk diabetes prevention lifestyle intervention (NDPS) on glycaemic control in screen-detected type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this trial was to test if the Norfolk Diabetes Prevention Study (NDPS) lifestyle intervention, recently shown to reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes in high-risk groups, also improved glycaemic control in people with newly diagnosed screen-detected type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We screened 12,778 participants at high risk of type 2 diabetes using a fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). People with screen-detected type 2 diabetes were randomised in a parallel, three-arm, controlled trial with up to 46 months of follow-up, with a control arm (CON), a group-based lifestyle intervention of 6 core and up to 15 maintenance sessions (INT), or the same intervention with additional support from volunteers with type 2 diabetes trained to co-deliver the lifestyle intervention (INT-DPM). The pre-specified primary end point was mean HbA1c compared between groups at 12 months. RESULTS: We randomised 432 participants (CON 149; INT 142; INT-DPM 141) with a mean (SD) age of 63.5 (10.0) years, body mass index (BMI) of 32.4 (6.4) kg/m2, and HbA1c of 52.5 (10.2) mmol/mol. The primary outcome of mean HbA1c at 12 months (CON 48.5 (9.1) mmol/mol, INT 46.5 (8.1) mmol/mol, and INT-DPM 45.6 (6.0) mmol/mol) was significantly lower in the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (adjusted difference -2.57 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.5, -0.6; p = 0.007) but not significantly different between the INT-DPM and INT arms (-0.55 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.46, 1.35; p = 0.57), or INT vs CON arms (-2.14 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.33, 0.05; p = 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed the intervention had greater effect in participants < 65 years old (difference in mean HbA1c compared to CON -4.76 mmol/mol; 95% CI -7.75, -1.78 mmol/mol) than in older participants (-0.46 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.67, 1.75; interaction p = 0.02). This effect was most significant in the INT-DPM arm (-6.01 mmol/mol; 95% CI -9.56, -2.46 age < 65 years old and -0.22 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.7, 2.25; aged > 65 years old; p = 0.007). The use of oral hypoglycaemic medication was associated with a significantly lower mean HbA1c but only within the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (-7.0 mmol/mol; 95% CI -11.5, -2.5; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The NDPS lifestyle intervention significantly improved glycaemic control after 12 months in people with screen-detected type 2 diabetes when supported by trained peer mentors with type 2 diabetes, particularly those receiving oral hypoglycaemics and those under 65 years old. The effect size was modest, however, and not sustained at 24 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34805606 . Retrospectively registered 14.4.16.

Molecular comparison of interval and screen-detected breast cancers.

Breast cancer (BC) diagnosed after a negative mammogram but prior to the next screening episode is termed an 'interval BC' (IBC). Understanding the molecular differences between IBC and screen-detected BCs (SDBC) could improve mammographic screening and management options. Therefore, we assessed both germline and somatic genomic aberrations in a prospective cohort. Utilising the Lifepool cohort of >54 000 women attending mammographic screening programs, 930 BC cases with screening status were identified (726 SDBC and 204 IBC). Clinico-pathological and family history information were recorded. Germline and tumour DNA were collected where available and sequenced for BC predisposition and driver gene mutations. Compared to SDBC, IBCs were significantly associated with a younger age at diagnosis and tumour characteristics associated with worse prognosis. Germline DNA assessment of BC cases that developed post-enrolment (276 SDBCs and 77 IBCs) for pathogenic mutations in 12 hereditary BC predisposition genes identified 8 carriers (2.27%). The germline mutation frequency was higher in IBC versus SDBC, although not statistically significant (3.90% versus 1.81%, p = 0.174). Comparing somatic genetic features of IBC and SDBC matched for grade, histological subtype and hormone receptor revealed no significant differences, with the exception of higher homologous recombination deficiency scores in IBC, and copy number changes on chromosome Xq in triple negative SDBCs. Our data demonstrates that while IBCs are clinically more aggressive than SDBC, when matched for confounding clinico-pathological features they do not represent a unique molecular class of invasive BC, but could be a consequence of timing of tumour initiation and mammographic screening. Copyright © 2019 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Differences between screen-detected and interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers.

BACKGROUND: BRCA mutation carriers have an elevated lifetime breast cancer risk and remain at risk for interval cancer development. We sought to compare BRCA mutation carriers with screen-detected versus interval breast cancers. METHODS: Women with a known BRCA mutation prior to a breast cancer diagnosis were identified. Clinical and pathologic factors, and imaging within 18 months of diagnosis were compared among screen-detected versus interval cancers. Interval cancers were those detected by physical exam among women undergoing regular screening. RESULTS: Of 124 breast cancers, 92 were screen and 22 clinically detected, of which 11 were interval cancers among regular screeners, and 10 were incidentally found on prophylactic mastectomy. Women with interval cancers were younger, had lower body mass indexes, and were more likely to be Black than those with screen-detected cancers (p < 0.05). Interval cancers were all invasive, larger, more likely to be node positive, and more likely to require axillary lymph node dissection and chemotherapy (p < 0.05). No significant differences were seen by BRCA mutation, mammographic density, MRI background parenchymal enhancement, tumor grade, or receptor status between cohorts. Women screened with both mammogram and MRI had significantly lower proportions of interval cancers compared to women screened with only mammogram or MRI alone (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers have worse clinicopathologic features than screen-detected tumors, and require more-aggressive medical and surgical therapy. Imaging with mammogram and MRI is associated with lower interval cancer development and should be utilized among this high-risk population.

Behaviour and characteristics of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: literature review and single-centre retrospective series.

AIMS: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a heterogeneous disease that has risen to prominence and more recently controversy, with the advent of screening mammography. Debate concerning the true biological potential of low nuclear grade DCIS continues to challenge therapeutic considerations. In this study, we carried out a comprehensive literature review of the behaviour, outcomes and current management trials of low-grade DCIS, as well as a retrospective study of a large single institutional series of low-grade DCIS diagnosed at our hospital. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 195 cases of low-grade DCIS diagnosed at the Singapore General Hospital from 1994 to 2010. Clinicopathological parameters and follow-up data were retrieved and compared between screen-detected and symptomatic low-grade DCIS. Immunohistochemistry was performed for ER, PR and HER2. Among 195 cases, 123 (63.1%) were screen-detected, while 72 (36.9%) were symptomatic. Screen-detected cases had frequent calcifications (P < 0.001) and were smaller (P = 0.018) than symptomatic cases. All cases were ER-positive and rate of PR expression was high. No HER2 overexpression was observed. Mean and median follow-up periods were 107.8 and 109.6 months, respectively. Six patients recurred ipsilaterally, and one patient developed direct distant metastasis. One breast cancer-related death was recorded. Positive surgical margins (P = 0.023) were significantly associated with a higher risk of ipsilateral recurrences, as well as poorer disease-free survivals (P = 0.010). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that low-grade DCIS may be followed by invasive recurrences and even metastatic disease, requiring more study before being regarded as innocuous and indolent.

The added value of mammography in different age-groups of women with and without BRCA mutation screened with breast MRI.

BACKGROUND: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most sensitive imaging method for breast cancer detection and is therefore offered as a screening technique to women at increased risk of developing breast cancer. However, mammography is currently added from the age of 30 without proven benefits. The purpose of this study is to investigate the added cancer detection of mammography when breast MRI is available, focusing on the value in women with and without BRCA mutation, and in the age groups above and below 50 years. METHODS: This retrospective single-center study evaluated 6553 screening rounds in 2026 women at increased risk of breast cancer (1 January 2003 to 1 January 2014). Risk category (BRCA mutation versus others at increased risk of breast cancer), age at examination, recall, biopsy, and histopathological diagnosis were recorded. Cancer yield, false positive recall rate (FPR), and false positive biopsy rate (FPB) were calculated using generalized estimating equations for separate age categories (< 40, 40-50, 50-60, ≥ 60 years). Numbers of screens needed to detect an additional breast cancer with mammography (NSN) were calculated for the subgroups. RESULTS: Of a total of 125 screen-detected breast cancers, 112 were detected by MRI and 66 by mammography: 13 cancers were solely detected by mammography, including 8 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ. In BRCA mutation carriers, 3 of 61 cancers were detected only on mammography, while in other women 10 of 64 cases were detected with mammography alone. While 77% of mammography-detected-only cancers were detected in women ≥ 50 years of age, mammography also added more to the FPR in these women. Below 50 years the number of mammographic examinations needed to find an MRI-occult cancer was 1427. CONCLUSIONS: Mammography is of limited added value in terms of cancer detection when breast MRI is available for women of all ages who are at increased risk. While the benefit appears slightly larger in women over 50 years of age without BRCA mutation, there is also a substantial increase in false positive findings in these women.

Predicting interval and screen-detected breast cancers from mammographic density defined by different brightness thresholds.

BACKGROUND: Case-control studies show that mammographic density is a better risk factor when defined at higher than conventional pixel-brightness thresholds. We asked if this applied to interval and/or screen-detected cancers. METHOD: We conducted a nested case-control study within the prospective Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study including 168 women with interval and 422 with screen-detected breast cancers, and 498 and 1197 matched controls, respectively. We measured absolute and percent mammographic density using the Cumulus software at the conventional threshold (Cumulus) and two increasingly higher thresholds (Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively). Measures were transformed and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI). Using conditional logistic regression and adjusting for BMI by age at mammogram, we estimated risk discrimination by the odds ratio per adjusted standard deviation (OPERA), calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared nested models using the likelihood ratio criterion and models with the same number of parameters using the difference in Bayesian information criterion (ΔBIC). RESULTS: For interval cancer, there was very strong evidence that the association was best predicted by Cumulus as a percentage (OPERA = 2.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85-2.92); all ΔBIC > 14), and the association with BMI was independent of age at mammogram. After adjusting for percent Cumulus, no other measure was associated with risk (all P > 0.1). For screen-detected cancer, however, the associations were strongest for the absolute and percent Cirrocumulus measures (all ΔBIC > 6), and after adjusting for Cirrocumulus, no other measure was associated with risk (all P > 0.07). CONCLUSION: The amount of brighter areas is the best mammogram-based measure of screen-detected breast cancer risk, while the percentage of the breast covered by white or bright areas is the best mammogram-based measure of interval breast cancer risk, irrespective of BMI. Therefore, there are different features of mammographic images that give clinically important information about different outcomes.

Is the incidence of advanced-stage breast cancer affected by whether women attend a steady-state screening program?

In this cross-sectional population-based study, we assessed the incidence of advanced breast cancer based on screening attendance. Women from the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included if aged ≥49 years and diagnosed with breast cancer between 2006 and 2011, and data were linked with the screening program. Cancers were defined as screen-related (diagnosed <24 months after screening) or nonscreened (all other breast cancers). Two cut-offs were used to define advanced breast cancer: TNM-stage (III-IV vs 0-I-II) and T-stage alone (≥15 mm vs <15 mm or DCIS). The incidence rates were adjusted for age and logistic regression was used to compare groups. Of the 72,612 included women diagnosed with breast cancer, 44,246 (61%) had screen-related breast cancer. By TNM stage, advanced cancer was almost three times as likely to be at an advanced TNM stage in the nonscreened group compared with the screen-related group (38 and 94 per 100,000, respectively; OR: 2.86, 95%CI: 2.72-3.00). By T-stage, the incidence of advanced cancer was higher overall, and in nonscreened women was significantly higher than in screened women (210 and 169 per 100,000; OR: 1.85, 95%CI: 1.78-1.93). Data on actual screening attendance showed that the incidence of advanced breast cancer was significantly higher in nonscreened women than in screened women, supporting the expectation that screening would cause a stage shift to early detection. Despite critical evaluations of breast cancer screening programs, our data show that breast cancer screening is a valuable tool that can reduce the disease burden in women.

Is the recent increase in cervical cancer in women aged 20-24years in England a cause for concern?

The rates of cervical cancer (CxCa) in England among women aged 20-24yrs increased from 2.7 in 2012 to 4.6 per 100,000 in 2014 (p=0.0006). There was concern that the sudden increase was linked to the withdrawal of cervical screening in women aged 20-24 (a policy that affected women born since 1984). We analyse granular data on age and FIGO stage at diagnosis using a generalised linear model to see whether the unprecedented increase in CxCa in young women in 2014 was linked to the change in 2012 to the age at which the first invitation to screening was sent (from 25.0 to 24.5). Annual rates of CxCa per 100,000 women aged 20.0-24.5yrs decreased gradually over time, whereas at age 24.5-25.0yrs they increased from an average of 16 pre-2013 to 49 in 2015. An increase of 20.3 per 100,000 women aged 24.5-25.0yrs (95% CI: 15.2-25.4) was associated with inviting women for screening at age 24.5yrs instead of at age 25.0. At age 25.0-25.5yrs, rates decreased by 23.7 per 100,000 after women were invited at age 24.5yrs (p<0.001). All these changes were limited to stage I CxCa. There was a dramatic increase in diagnoses at age 25yrs in 2009-2011 associated with changing the age at first invitation from 20yrs to 25yrs. No changes were observed at age 26.0-27.0yrs. The increase in CxCa aged 20-24 is attributable to an increase in the proportion of women first screened aged 24.5yrs. The increase was limited to stage I CxCa. There is no evidence of a lack of screening leading to increasing rates.

The effect of mode of detection of breast cancer on stress and distress.

OBJECTIVE: The number of women with screen-detected breast cancer is increasing, but it is not clear if these women experience the same levels of distress as women with symptomatic breast cancer. The current study compared stress and distress in women with screen-detected or symptomatic breast cancer at diagnosis and 12 months post-diagnosis. METHODS: Ninety-two women with screen-detected breast cancer and 129 women with symptomatic breast cancer completed measures of perceived stress, anxiety, and depression at diagnosis and 12 months post-diagnosis. Women also completed a measure of cancer-related stress 12 months post-diagnosis. RESULTS: Both groups reported similar levels of perceived stress, anxiety, and depression at diagnosis. A third of women in both groups reported clinical levels of anxiety at diagnosis, which decreased over time. There were no differences in depression. Analyses revealed that at 12 months post-diagnosis, the symptomatic group reported a significant reduction in anxiety, but the screen-detected group reported a nonsignificant trend for a reduction over time. The screen-detected group reported significantly higher cancer-related stress at 12 months than the symptomatic group. CONCLUSIONS: Screen-detected women report similar distress at diagnosis but may be more at risk for greater distress requiring further psychological support 1 year after diagnosis. Future interventions that focus on preparation for screening may help to reduce ongoing levels of anxiety and cancer-related stress for this group.

Incremental Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Intensive Treatment in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Detected by Screening in the ADDITION-UK Trial: An Update with Empirical Trial-Based Cost Data.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty about the cost effectiveness of early intensive treatment versus routine care in individuals with type 2 diabetes detected by screening. OBJECTIVES: To derive a trial-informed estimate of the incremental costs of intensive treatment as delivered in the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care-Europe (ADDITION) trial and to revisit the long-term cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the UK National Health Service. METHODS: We analyzed the electronic primary care records of a subsample of the ADDITION-Cambridge trial cohort (n = 173). Unit costs of used primary care services were taken from the published literature. Incremental annual costs of intensive treatment versus routine care in years 1 to 5 after diagnosis were calculated using multilevel generalized linear models. We revisited the long-term cost-utility analyses for the ADDITION-UK trial cohort and reported results for ADDITION-Cambridge using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model and the trial-informed cost estimates according to a previously developed evaluation framework. RESULTS: Incremental annual costs of intensive treatment over years 1 to 5 averaged £29.10 (standard error = £33.00) for consultations with general practitioners and nurses and £54.60 (standard error = £28.50) for metabolic and cardioprotective medication. For ADDITION-UK, over the 10-, 20-, and 30-year time horizon, adjusted incremental quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were 0.014, 0.043, and 0.048, and adjusted incremental costs were £1,021, £1,217, and £1,311, resulting in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £71,232/QALY, £28,444/QALY, and £27,549/QALY, respectively. Respective incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for ADDITION-Cambridge were slightly higher. CONCLUSIONS: The incremental costs of intensive treatment as delivered in the ADDITION-Cambridge trial were lower than expected. Given UK willingness-to-pay thresholds in patients with screen-detected diabetes, intensive treatment is of borderline cost effectiveness over a time horizon of 20 years and more.

Towards personalized screening: Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes in women with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer.

Several reviews have estimated the balance of benefits and harms of mammographic screening in the general population. The balance may, however, differ between individuals with and without family history. Therefore, our aim is to assess the cumulative risk of screening outcomes; screen-detected breast cancer, interval cancer, and false-positive results, in women screenees aged 50-75 and 40-75, with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer at the start of screening. Data on screening attendance, recall and breast cancer detection were collected for each woman living in Nijmegen (The Netherlands) since 1975. We used a discrete time survival model to calculate the cumulative probability of each major screening outcome over 19 screening rounds. Women with a family history of breast cancer had a higher risk of all screening outcomes. For women screened from age 50-75, the cumulative risk of screen-detected breast cancer, interval cancer and false-positive results were 9.0, 4.4 and 11.1% for women with a family history and 6.3, 2.7 and 7.3% for women without a family history, respectively. The results for women 40-75 followed the same pattern for women screened 50-75 for cancer outcomes, but were almost doubled for false-positive results. To conclude, women with a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer are more likely to experience benefits and harms of screening than women without a family history. To complete the balance and provide risk-based screening recommendations, the breast cancer mortality reduction and overdiagnosis should be estimated for family history subgroups.

Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated With Digital Versus Film-Screen Mammography for Screen-Detected and Interval Cancers.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether pathologic findings of screen-detected and interval cancers differ for digital versus film mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data from 2003-2011 on 3,021,515 screening mammograms (40.3% digital, 59.7% film) of women 40-89 years old were reviewed. Cancers were considered screen detected if diagnosed within 12 months of an examination with positive findings and interval if diagnosed within 12 months of an examination with negative findings. Tumor characteristics for screen-detected and interval cancers were compared for digital versus film mammography by use of logistic regression models to estimate the odds ratio and 95% CI with adjustment for age, race and ethnicity, hormone therapy use, screening interval, examination year, and registry. Generalized estimating equations were used to account for correlation within facilities. RESULTS: Among 15,729 breast cancers, 85.3% were screen detected and 14.7% were interval. Digital and film mammography had similar rates of screen-detected (4.47 vs 4.42 per 1000 examinations) and interval (0.73 vs 0.79 per 1000 examinations) cancers for digital versus film. In adjusted analyses, interval cancers diagnosed after digital examinations with negative findings were less likely to be American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIB or higher (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.93), have positive nodal status (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.64-0.95), or be estrogen receptor negative (odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91) than were interval cancers diagnosed after a film examination with negative findings. CONCLUSION: Screen-detected cancers diagnosed after digital and film mammography had similar rates of unfavorable tumor characteristics. Interval-detected cancers diagnosed after a digital examination were less likely to have unfavorable tumor features than those diagnosed after film mammography, but the absolute differences were small.

Using administrative data to estimate time to breast cancer diagnosis and percent of screen-detected breast cancers ­ a validation study in Alberta, Canada.

Appropriate use of administrative data enables the assessment of care quality at the population level. Our objective was to develop/validate methods for assessing quality of breast cancer diagnostic care using administrative data, specifically by identifying relevant medical tests to estimate the percentage screen/symptom-detected cancers and time to diagnosis. Two databases were created for all women diagnosed with a first-ever breast cancer in years 2007-2010 in Alberta, Canada, with dates of medical tests received in years 2006-2010. One purchased database had test results and was used to determine the 'true' first relevant test of a cancer diagnosis. The other free administrative database had test types but no test results. Receiver operating characteristic curves and concordance rates were used to assess estimates of percent screen/symptom-detected breast cancers; Log-rank test was used to assess time to diagnosis obtained from the two databases. Using a look-back period of 4-6 months from cancer diagnosis to identify relevant tests resulted in over 94% concordance, sensitivity and specificity for classifying patients into screen/symptom-detected group; good agreement between the distributions of time to diagnosis was also achieved. Our findings support the use of administrative data to accurately identify relevant tests for assessing the quality of breast cancer diagnostic care.

Digital breast tomosynthesis in mammographic screening: false negative cancer cases in the To-Be 1 trial.

OBJECTIVES: The randomized controlled trial comparing digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D mammograms (DBT + SM) versus digital mammography (DM) (the To-Be 1 trial), 2016-2017, did not result in higher cancer detection for DBT + SM. We aimed to determine if negative cases prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancers from DBT + SM were due to interpretive error. METHODS: Five external breast radiologists performed the individual blinded review of 239 screening examinations (90 true negative, 39 false positive, 19 prior to interval cancer, and 91 prior to consecutive screen-detected cancer) and the informed consensus review of examinations prior to interval and screen-detected cancers (n = 110). The reviewers marked suspicious findings with a score of 1-5 (probability of malignancy). A case was false negative if ≥ 2 radiologists assigned the cancer site with a score of ≥ 2 in the blinded review and if the case was assigned as false negative by a consensus in the informed review. RESULTS: In the informed review, 5.3% of examinations prior to interval cancer and 18.7% prior to consecutive round screen-detected cancer were considered false negative. In the blinded review, 10.6% of examinations prior to interval cancer and 42.9% prior to consecutive round screen-detected cancer were scored ≥ 2. A score of ≥ 2 was assigned to 47.8% of negative and 89.7% of false positive examinations. CONCLUSIONS: The false negative rates were consistent with those of prior DM reviews, indicating that the lack of higher cancer detection for DBT + SM versus DM in the To-Be 1 trial is complex and not due to interpretive error alone. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: The randomized controlled trial on digital breast tomosynthesis and synthetic 2D mammograms (DBT) and digital mammography (DM), 2016-2017, showed no difference in cancer detection for the two techniques. The rates of false negative screening examinations prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancer for DBT were consistent with the rates in prior DM reviews, indicating that the non-superior DBT performance in the trial might not be due to interpretive error alone. KEY POINTS: • Screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) did not result in a higher breast cancer detection rate compared to screening with digital mammography (DM) in the To-Be 1 trial. • The false negative rates for examinations prior to interval and consecutive screen-detected cancer for DBT were determined in the trial to test if the lack of differences was due to interpretive error. • The false negative rates were consistent with those of prior DM reviews, indicating that the lack of higher cancer detection for DBT versus DM was complex and not due to interpretive error alone.

The Impact of a Six-Year Existing Screening Programme Using the Faecal Immunochemical Test in Flanders (Belgium) on Colorectal Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Survival: A Population-Based Study.

The faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has been increasingly used for organised colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We assessed the impact of a six-year existing FIT screening programme in Flanders (Belgium) on CRC incidence, mortality and survival. The Flemish CRC screening programme started in 2013, targeting individuals aged 50-74 years. Joinpoint regression was used to investigate trends of age-standardised CRC incidence and mortality among individuals aged 50-79 years (2004-2019). Their 5-year relative survival was calculated using the Ederer II method. We found that FIT screening significantly reduced CRC incidence, especially that of advanced-stage CRCs (69.8/100,000 in 2012 vs. 51.1/100,000 in 2019), with a greater impact in men. Mortality started to decline in men two years after organised screening implementation (annual reduction of 9.3% after 2015 vs. 2.2% before 2015). The 5-year relative survival was significantly higher in screen-detected (93.8%) and lower in FIT non-participant CRCs (61.9%) vs. FIT interval cancers and CRCs in never-invited cases (67.6% and 66.7%, respectively). Organised FIT screening in Flanders clearly reduced CRC incidence (especially advanced-stage) and mortality (in men, but not yet in women). Survival is significantly better in screen-detected cases vs. CRCs in unscreened people. Our findings support the implementation of FIT organised screening and the continued effort to increase uptake.