• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

美国与英国乳腺钼靶筛查的比较。

Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.

作者信息

Smith-Bindman Rebecca, Chu Philip W, Miglioretti Diana L, Sickles Edward A, Blanks Roger, Ballard-Barbash Rachel, Bobo Janet K, Lee Nancy C, Wallis Matthew G, Patnick Julietta, Kerlikowske Karla

机构信息

Department of Radiology, University of California, San Francisco 94115, USA.

出版信息

JAMA. 2003 Oct 22;290(16):2129-37. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.16.2129.

DOI:10.1001/jama.290.16.2129
PMID:14570948
Abstract

CONTEXT

Screening mammography differs between the United States and the United Kingdom; a direct comparison may suggest methods to improve the practice.

OBJECTIVE

To compare screening mammography performance between the United States and the United Kingdom among similar-aged women.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 50 years or older were identified who underwent 5.5 million mammograms from January 1, 1996, to December 31, 1999, within 3 large-scale mammography registries or screening programs: the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC, n = 978 591) and National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP, n = 613 388) in the United States; and the National Health Service Breast Screening Program (NHSBSP, n = 3.94 million) in the United Kingdom. A total of 27 612 women were diagnosed with breast cancer (invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ) within 12 months of screening among the 3 groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Recall rates (recommendation for further evaluation including diagnostic imaging, ultrasound, clinical examination, or biopsy) and cancer detection rates were calculated for first and subsequent mammograms, and within 5-year age groups.

RESULTS

Recall rates were approximately twice as high in the United States than in the United Kingdom for all age groups; however, cancer rates were similar. Among women aged 50 to 54 years who underwent a first screening mammogram, 14.4% in the BCSC and 12.5% in the NBCCEDP were recalled for further evaluation vs only 7.6% in the NHSBSP. Cancer detection rates per 1000 mammogram screens were 5.8, 5.9, and 6.3, in the BCSC, NBCCEDP, and NHSBSP, respectively. Recall rates were lower for subsequent examinations in all 3 settings but remained twice as high in the United States. A similar percentage of women underwent biopsy in each setting, but rates of percutaneous biopsy were lower and open surgical biopsy higher in the United States. Open surgical biopsies not resulting in a diagnosis of cancer (negative biopsies) were twice as high in the United States than in the United Kingdom. Based on a 10-year period of screening 1000 women aged 50 to 59 years, 477, 433, and 175 women in the BCSC, NBCCEDP, and NHSBSP, respectively, would be recalled; and for women aged 60 to 69 years, 396, 334, and 133 women, respectively. The estimated cancer detection rates per 1000 women aged 50 to 59 years were 24.5, 23.8, and 19.4, respectively, and for women aged 60 to 69 years, 31.5, 26.6, and 27.9, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Recall and negative open surgical biopsy rates are twice as high in US settings than in the United Kingdom but cancer detection rates are similar. Efforts to improve US mammographic screening should target lowering the recall rate without reducing the cancer detection rate.

摘要

背景

美国和英国的乳腺钼靶筛查存在差异;直接比较可能会提出改进筛查实践的方法。

目的

比较美国和英国同龄女性的乳腺钼靶筛查效果。

设计、地点和参与者:识别出年龄在50岁及以上的女性,她们在1996年1月1日至1999年12月31日期间,在3个大型乳腺钼靶登记处或筛查项目中接受了550万次乳腺钼靶检查:美国的乳腺癌监测协会(BCSC,n = 978591)和国家乳腺与宫颈癌早期检测项目(NBCCEDP,n = 613388);以及英国的国民健康服务乳腺筛查项目(NHSBSP,n = 394万)。在这3组中,共有27612名女性在筛查后12个月内被诊断出患有乳腺癌(浸润性癌或导管原位癌)。

主要观察指标

计算首次及后续乳腺钼靶检查以及5岁年龄组内的召回率(建议进一步评估,包括诊断性影像学检查、超声检查、临床检查或活检)和癌症检出率。

结果

所有年龄组的召回率在美国约为英国的两倍;然而,癌症检出率相似。在接受首次乳腺钼靶筛查的50至54岁女性中,BCSC组有14.4%、NBCCEDP组有12.5%被召回进一步评估,而NHSBSP组仅为7.6%。每1000次乳腺钼靶筛查的癌症检出率在BCSC组、NBCCEDP组和NHSBSP组中分别为5.8、5.9和6.3。在所有3种情况下,后续检查的召回率较低,但在美国仍为英国的两倍。每种情况下接受活检的女性比例相似,但美国的经皮活检率较低,开放手术活检率较高。在美国,未诊断出癌症的开放手术活检(阴性活检)率是英国的两倍。基于对1000名50至59岁女性进行10年筛查的情况,BCSC组、NBCCEDP组和NHSBSP组分别有477名、433名和175名女性会被召回;对于60至69岁的女性,分别有396名、334名和133名。每1000名50至59岁女性的估计癌症检出率分别为24.5、23.8和19.4,对于60至69岁的女性,分别为31.5、26.6和27.9。

结论

美国的召回率和阴性开放手术活检率是英国的两倍,但癌症检出率相似。改进美国乳腺钼靶筛查的努力应旨在降低召回率,同时不降低癌症检出率。

相似文献

1
Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.美国与英国乳腺钼靶筛查的比较。
JAMA. 2003 Oct 22;290(16):2129-37. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.16.2129.
2
Comparing the performance of mammography screening in the USA and the UK.比较美国和英国乳腺钼靶筛查的效果。
J Med Screen. 2005;12(1):50-4. doi: 10.1258/0969141053279130.
3
The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: report on the first 4 years of mammography provided to medically underserved women.国家乳腺癌和宫颈癌早期检测项目:为医疗服务不足的女性提供的前4年乳房X光检查报告。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Jan;170(1):97-104. doi: 10.2214/ajr.170.1.9423608.
4
Breast cancer screening among low-income or uninsured women: results from the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, July 1995 to March 2002 (United States).低收入或未参保女性的乳腺癌筛查:1995年7月至2002年3月美国国家乳腺癌和宫颈癌早期检测项目的结果
Cancer Causes Control. 2006 Feb;17(1):29-38. doi: 10.1007/s10552-005-4558-y.
5
Clinical outcomes of mammography in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, 2009-2012.2009 - 2012年国家乳腺癌和宫颈癌早期检测项目中乳房X光检查的临床结果
Cancer Causes Control. 2015 May;26(5):723-32. doi: 10.1007/s10552-015-0567-7. Epub 2015 Mar 26.
6
Implementing recommendations for the early detection of breast and cervical cancer among low-income women.落实针对低收入女性乳腺癌和宫颈癌早期检测的建议。
MMWR Recomm Rep. 2000 Mar 31;49(RR-2):37-55.
7
Factors associated with imaging and procedural events used to detect breast cancer after screening mammography.与用于筛查乳腺钼靶检查后检测乳腺癌的影像学和程序性事件相关的因素。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Feb;188(2):385-92. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.1718.
8
Breast Biopsy Intensity and Findings Following Breast Cancer Screening in Women With and Without a Personal History of Breast Cancer.乳腺癌筛查中有无乳腺癌个人史女性的乳腺活检强度和结果。
JAMA Intern Med. 2018 Apr 1;178(4):458-468. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.8549.
9
Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.比较美国和丹麦乳腺钼靶筛查的敏感性和特异性。
Int J Cancer. 2015 Nov 1;137(9):2198-207. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29593. Epub 2015 Jun 1.
10
Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital Screening Mammography With and Without Computer-Aided Detection.有和没有计算机辅助检测的数字化乳腺筛查钼靶摄影的诊断准确性
JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Nov;175(11):1828-37. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.5231.

引用本文的文献

1
Screening mammography performance according to breast density: a comparison between radiologists versus standalone intelligence detection.根据乳腺密度评估乳腺钼靶筛查性能:放射科医生与独立智能检测的比较。
Breast Cancer Res. 2024 Apr 22;26(1):68. doi: 10.1186/s13058-024-01821-w.
2
COVID-19 related change in breast cancer diagnosis, stage, treatment, and case volume: 2019-2021.COVID-19 相关的乳腺癌诊断、分期、治疗和病例量变化:2019-2021 年。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2023 Nov;202(1):105-115. doi: 10.1007/s10549-023-06962-8. Epub 2023 Aug 16.
3
Cancer overdiagnosis: a challenge in the era of screening.
癌症过度诊断:筛查时代的一项挑战。
J Natl Cancer Cent. 2022 Dec;2(4):235-242. doi: 10.1016/j.jncc.2022.08.005. Epub 2022 Aug 21.
4
Artificial Intelligence in Medical Imaging-Learning From Past Mistakes in Mammography.医学影像中的人工智能——从乳腺X线摄影术过去的错误中吸取教训
JAMA Health Forum. 2022 Feb 4;3(2):e215207. doi: 10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.5207.
5
Feasibility and accuracy of digital breast tomosynthesis-guided vacuum-assisted breast biopsy for noncalcified mammographic targets.数字化乳腺断层合成引导下针对非钙化乳腺钼靶目标的真空辅助乳腺活检的可行性和准确性
Diagn Interv Radiol. 2022 Mar;28(2):171-178. doi: 10.5152/dir.2022.20830.
6
Breast cancer screening outcomes among Mexican-origin Hispanic women participating in a breast cancer screening program.参与乳腺癌筛查项目的墨西哥裔西班牙裔女性的乳腺癌筛查结果。
Prev Med Rep. 2021 Sep 20;24:101561. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101561. eCollection 2021 Dec.
7
Test Sets and Real-Life Performance: Can One Predict the Other?测试集与实际性能:二者能相互预测吗?
Radiol Imaging Cancer. 2020 Sep 25;2(5):e200126. doi: 10.1148/rycan.2020200126. eCollection 2020 Sep.
8
Development and first application of an audit system for screening programs based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model: an experience with breast cancer screening in the region of Lombardy (Italy).基于 PRECEDE-PROCEED 模式的筛查项目审核系统的开发与首次应用:在意大利伦巴第大区(意大利)进行乳腺癌筛查的经验。
BMC Public Health. 2020 Nov 25;20(1):1778. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09842-8.
9
Breast cancer distant recurrence lead time interval by detection method in an institutional cohort.基于机构队列研究的乳腺癌远处复发的检测方法及时间间隔。
BMC Cancer. 2020 Nov 20;20(1):1124. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-07609-3.
10
Screening mammography with special reference to guidelines in South Africa.乳腺钼靶筛查,特别提及南非的相关指南。
SA J Radiol. 2018 Oct 31;22(2):1370. doi: 10.4102/sajr.v22i2.1370. eCollection 2018.