Overdiagnosis Due to Screening Mammography for Breast Cancer among Women Aged 40 Years and Over: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the incidence of overdiagnosis due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older. A PRISMA systematic search appraisal and meta-analysis were conducted. A systematic literature search of English publications in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, and Google Scholar was conducted without regard to the region or time period. Generic, methodological, and statistical data were extracted from the eligible studies. A meta-analysis was completed by utilizing comprehensive meta-analysis software. The effect size estimates were calculated using the fail-safe N test. The funnel plot and the Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation tests were employed to find any potential bias among the included articles. The strength of the association between two variables was assessed using Kendall’s tau. Heterogeneity was measured using the I-squared (I2) test. The literature search in the five databases yielded a total of 4214 studies. Of those, 30 articles were included in the final analysis, with sample sizes ranging from 451 to 1,429,890 women. The vast majority of the articles were retrospective cohort designs (24 articles). The age of the recruited women ranged between 40 and 89 years old. The incidence of overdiagnosis due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older was 12.6%. There was high heterogeneity among the study articles (I2 = 99.993), and the pooled event rate was 0.126 (95% CI: 15 0.101–0.156). Despite the random-effects meta-analysis showing a high degree of heterogeneity among the articles, the screening tests have to allow for a certain degree of overdiagnosis (12.6%) due to screening mammography for breast cancer among women aged 40 years and older. Furthermore, efforts should be directed toward controlling and minimizing the harmful consequences associated with breast cancer screening.

Analysis of polarization features of human breast cancer tissue by Mueller matrix visualization

“…6 MRI can detect minute abnormalities that may be missed by mammography; however, it is expensive and has low specificity, resulting in possible overdiagnosis. 7 PET is the most accurate method for visualizing the progression of cancer and its treatment response. However, it requires the injection of radioactive tracer, which can cause numerous side effects and radiation exposure.…”

“…Mammography, which uses X-ray images to identify breast cancer tissue, is the most sensitive method for detecting breast cancer but has a high incidence rate of false-positive and false-negative readings, which can lead to therapeutic complications, overtreatment, and mental distress 6 . MRI can detect minute abnormalities that may be missed by mammography; however, it is expensive and has low specificity, resulting in possible overdiagnosis 7 . PET is the most accurate method for visualizing the progression of cancer and its treatment response.…”