Andersen Sune Bangsbøll, Vejborg Ilse, von Euler-Chelpin My
Department of Epidemiology, Institute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Acta Oncol. 2008;47(4):550-5. doi: 10.1080/02841860801935483.
There is an ongoing debate concerning possible disadvantages of mammography screening, one being the consequence of receiving a false positive test-result. It is argued that receiving a false positive answer may have short- and/or long-term adverse psychological effects on women, but results from different studies are conflicting. We tested if there was a difference in continued participation behaviour between the group of women who have been subject to a false positive result and those who have not.
The study used the registers from the first six invitation rounds of the mammography screening programme in Copenhagen (1991-2003). We estimated the relative risk of not participating in the subsequent screening round for women with a false positive test using women with a negative test as baseline. As outcome measure odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used.
There was no significant difference in participation in the subsequent round between women with a false positive test and women with a negative test. The proportion of screens resulting in false positive answers, both after assessment and after surgery, decreased from 5.54% in Round 1 to 1.79% in Round 5. Participation in the subsequent screening round was well above 80% in all five screening rounds.
Our results showed that women experiencing a false positive test at mammography screening participated in the subsequent screening round to the same extent as did women experiencing a negative screening test, regardless of whether the false positive statement was given following assessment or following surgery. The benign to malignant biopsy ratio, comparing the type B false positives to the true positives, was by the fifth round well below the desirable level of </=1:4, recommended by the European guidelines. Other possible adverse effects should be further investigated.
关于乳腺钼靶筛查可能存在的弊端存在持续的争论,其中之一是收到假阳性检测结果的后果。有人认为,收到假阳性结果可能会对女性产生短期和/或长期的不良心理影响,但不同研究的结果相互矛盾。我们测试了曾收到假阳性结果的女性组与未收到假阳性结果的女性组在继续参与筛查行为上是否存在差异。
本研究使用了哥本哈根乳腺钼靶筛查项目前六轮邀请(1991 - 2003年)的登记记录。我们以检测结果为阴性的女性作为基线,估计了检测结果为假阳性的女性不参加后续筛查轮次的相对风险。以比值比(OR)及95%置信区间(CI)作为结果测量指标。
检测结果为假阳性的女性与检测结果为阴性的女性在参与后续轮次筛查方面没有显著差异。经评估及手术后出现假阳性结果的筛查比例从第1轮的5.54%降至第5轮的1.79%。在所有五轮筛查中,参与后续筛查轮次的比例均远高于80%。
我们的结果表明,在乳腺钼靶筛查中检测结果为假阳性的女性参与后续筛查轮次的程度与检测结果为阴性的女性相同,无论假阳性结果是在评估后还是手术后给出的。将B类假阳性与真阳性进行比较的良性与恶性活检比例,到第五轮时远低于欧洲指南推荐的理想水平(≤1:4)。其他可能的不良影响应进一步研究。