< Back to previous page

Publication

Breast cancer risk is increased in the years following false-positive breast cancer screening

Journal Contribution - Journal Article

A small number of studies have investigated breast cancer (BC) risk among women with a history of false-positive recall (FPR) in BC screening, but none of them has used time-to-event analysis while at the same time quantifying the effect of false-negative diagnostic assessment (FNDA). FNDA occurs when screening detects BC, but this BC is missed on diagnostic assessment (DA). As a result of FNDA, screenings that detected cancer are incorrectly classified as FPR. Our study linked data recorded in the Flemish BC screening program (women aged 50-69 years) to data from the national cancer registry. We used Cox proportional hazards models on a retrospective cohort of 298 738 women to assess the association between FPR and subsequent BC, while adjusting for potential confounders. The mean follow-up was 6.9 years. Compared with women without recall, women with a history of FPR were at an increased risk of developing BC [hazard ratio=2.10 (95% confidence interval: 1.92-2.31)]. However, 22% of BC after FPR was due to FNDA. The hazard ratio dropped to 1.69 (95% confidence interval: 1.52-1.87) when FNDA was excluded. Women with FPR have a subsequently increased BC risk compared with women without recall. The risk is higher for women who have a FPR BI-RADS 4 or 5 compared with FPR BI-RADS 3. There is room for improvement of diagnostic assessment: 41% of the excess risk is explained by FNDA after baseline screening.

Journal: Eur J Cancer Prev
ISSN: 0959-8278
Issue: 5
Volume: 26
Pages: 396-403
Publication year:2017
Keywords:Aged, Belgium/epidemiology, Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis, Breast/diagnostic imaging, Early Detection of Cancer/adverse effects, False Negative Reactions, False Positive Reactions, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Mammography/adverse effects, Mass Screening/adverse effects, Middle Aged, Proportional Hazards Models, Registries/statistics & numerical data, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors
CSS-citation score:1
Authors:International