Radiological review of interval cancers in an Australian mammographic screening programme

Author:

Amos A.F.1,Kavanagh A.M.2,Cawson J.3,

Affiliation:

1. BreastScreen Victoria Inc, Coordination Unit, 31 Pelham Street, Carlton South, Victoria 3053, Australia

2. Australian Research Centre for Sex, Health and Society, LaTrobe University, Level 1, 215 Franklin Street, Carlton South, Victoria 3053, Australia

3. St Vincent's BreastScreen, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Victoria 3065, Australia

Abstract

Objectives To determine the proportion and features of invasive interval cancers that could be considered detectable at the time of the previous screen and the proportion of cases that could be classified as true intervals, false negatives, minimal signs, or radiographically occult lesions. Setting BreastScreen Victoria, the Victorian component of the BreastScreen Australia mammography screening programme. Methods Two separate review methodologies were adopted. Firstly a blinded review of interval, screen detected, and normal cases was undertaken, followed by a confirmation exercise to determine the proportion of invasive interval cancers that could be considered detectable at the time of the previous screen. Secondly, an unblinded review was performed to classify interval cases as true interval, false negative, minimal signs, or radiographically occult. Results From the blinded review, it was estimated that 38% of interval cases may be considered “potentially detectable” at the time of screening. Comparison of the characteristics of interval and screen detected cases indicates that interval cases are more likely to be smaller, equivocal, ill defined masses. In the unblinded exercise, 41% of interval cases were classified as false negatives and a further 16% as minimal signs, 33% true intervals, and 10% radiographically occult. Of the interval cancers considered potentially detectable at screening, 97% were classified as false negatives in the unblinded review. Conclusions This study highlights the importance of adopting staged review methods with both blinded and unblinded components. The blinded review and confirmation exercise allows the determination of the proportion of interval cases that could be considered potentially detectable at screening. The unblinded review provides an active important opportunity for professional development and review and a mechanism to link into the blinded review through further classification of interval cases.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3