Measuring the burden of interval cancers in long-standing screening mammography programmes

Abstract

The value of the PICR is hugely influenced by which method is applied, whereas the ICR is calculated purely on data available within programmes. We find that the PICR, the establishing indicator for sensitivity, could preferably be replaced by the ICR.

Repeat Screening Outcomes with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Plus Synthetic Mammography for Breast Cancer Detection: Results from the Prospective Verona Pilot Study

“…breast radiologists, in accordance with European screening guidance. In population-based screening programs, the general assumption is that if the reference screening modality (FFDM) is replaced by a more sensitive modality (DBT+SM), there is an initial increase of CDR at the first round, followed by a reduction in the CDR in subsequent rounds (17). The purpose of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of consecutive screening rounds from the Verona Pilot Study (4), for which, after a first round of imaging with DBT+SM, approximately half of the study participants underwent repeat screening with DBT+SM and the other half underwent repeat screening with FFDM.…”

Participation and adherence to mammography screening in the Capital Region of Denmark: The importance of age over time

“…However, of all women eligible to all 5 invitation rounds, only 65% participated in all rounds, which is significantly lower than the participation rate in any of the individual rounds. This finding could be problematic, as Andersen’s 2015 study found that continued regular adherence among individuals is needed for optimal protection [ 20 ].…”