Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2007;7(1):1-32. Epub 2007 Jan 1.
The aim of this review was to determine the effectiveness of screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer.
The effectiveness of screening mammography in women aged over 50 years has been established, yet the issue of screening in women aged 40 to 49 years is still unsettled. The Canadian Task Force of Preventive Services, which sets guidelines for screening mammography for all provinces, supports neither the inclusion nor the exclusion of this screening procedure for 40- to 49-year-old women from the periodic health examination. In addition to this, 2 separate reviews, one conducted in Quebec in 2005 and the other in Alberta in 2000, each concluded that there is an absence of convincing evidence on the effectiveness of screening mammography for women in this age group who are at average risk for breast cancer. In the United States, there is disagreement among organizations on whether population-based mammography should begin at the age of 40 or 50 years. The National Institutes of Health, the American Association for Cancer Research, and the American Academy of Family Physicians recommend against screening women in their 40s, whereas the United States Preventive Services Task Force, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American College of Radiology, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend screening mammograms for women aged 40 to 49 years. Furthermore, in comparing screening guidelines between Canada and the United States, it is also important to recognize that "standard care" within a socialized medical system such as Canada's differs from that of the United States. The National Breast Screening Study (NBSS-1), a randomized screening trial conducted in multiple centres across Canada, has shown there is no benefit in mortality from breast cancer from annual mammograms in women randomized between the ages of 40 and 49, relative to standard care (i.e. physical exam and teaching of breast-self examination on entry to the study, with usual community care thereafter). At present, organized screening programs in Canada systematically screen women starting at 50 years of age, although with a physician's referral, a screening mammogram is an insured service in Ontario for women under 50 years of age. International estimates of the epidemiology of breast cancer show that the incidence of breast cancer is increasing for all ages combined, whereas mortality is decreasing, though at a slower rate. These decreasing mortality rates may be attributed to screening and advances in breast cancer therapy over time. Decreases in mortality attributable to screening may be a result of the earlier detection and treatment of invasive cancers, in addition to the increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), of which certain subpathologies are less lethal. Evidence from the SEER cancer registry in the United States indicates that the age-adjusted incidence of DCIS has increased almost 10-fold over a 20-year period (from 2.7 to 25 per 100,000). The incidence of breast cancer is lower in women aged 40 to 49 years than in women aged 50 to 69 years (about 140 per 100,000 versus 500 per 100,000 women, respectively), as is the sensitivity (about 75% versus 85% for women aged under and over 50, respectively) and specificity of mammography (about 80% versus 90% for women aged under and over 50, respectively). The increased density of breast tissue in younger women is mainly responsible for the lower accuracy of this procedure in this age group. In addition, as the proportion of breast cancers that occur before the age of 50 are more likely to be associated with genetic predisposition as compared with those diagnosed in women after the age of 50, mammography may not be an optimal screening method for younger women. Treatment options vary with the stage of disease (based on tumor size, involvement of surrounding tissue, and number of affected axillary lymph nodes) and its pathology, and may include a combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy. Surgery is the first-line intervention for biopsy confirmed tumours. The subsequent use of radiation, chemotherapy, or hormonal treatments is dependent on the histopathologic characteristics of the tumor and the type of surgery. There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment of DCIS, which is noninvasive. With such controversy as to the effectiveness of mammography and the potential risk associated with women being overtreated or actual cancers being missed, and the increased risk of breast cancer associated with exposure to annual mammograms over a 10-year period, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee requested this review of screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer. This review is the first of 2 parts and concentrates on the effectiveness of screening mammography (i.e., film mammography, FM) for women at average risk aged 40 to 49 years. The second part will be an evaluation of screening by either magnetic resonance imaging or digital mammography, with the objective of determining the optimal screening modality in these younger women.
The following questions were asked: Does screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years who are at average risk for breast cancer reduce breast cancer mortality?What is the sensitivity and specificity of mammography for this age group?What are the risks associated with annual screening from ages 40 to 49?What are the risks associated with false positive and false negative mammography results?What are the economic considerations if evidence for effectiveness is established?THE MEDICAL ADVISORY SECRETARIAT FOLLOWED ITS STANDARD PROCEDURES AND SEARCHED THESE ELECTRONIC DATABASES: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. Keywords used in the search were breast cancer, breast neoplasms, mass screening, and mammography. In total, the search yielded 6,359 articles specific to breast cancer screening and mammography. This did not include reports on diagnostic mammograms. The search was further restricted to English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published between 1995 and 2005. Excluded were case reports, comments, editorials, and letters, which narrowed the results to 516 articles and previous health technology policy assessments. These were examined against the criteria outlined below. This resulted in the inclusion of 5 health technology assessments, the Canadian Preventive Services Task Force report, the United States Preventive Services Task Force report, 1 Cochrane review, and 8 RCTs.
English-language articles, and English and French-language health technology policy assessments, conducted by other organizations, from 1995 to 2005Articles specific to RCTs of screening mammography of women at average risk for breast cancer that included results for women randomized to studies between the ages of 40 and 49 yearsStudies in which women were randomized to screening with or without mammography, although women may have had clinical breast examinations and/or may have been conducting breast self-examination.UK Age Trial results published in December 2006.
Observational studies, including those nested within RCTsRCTs that do not include results on women between the ages of 40 and 49 at randomizationStudies in which mammography was compared with other radiologic screening modalities, for example, digital mammography, magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound.Studies in which women randomized had a personal history of breast cancer.
Film mammography
Within RCTs, the comparison group would have been women randomized to not undergo screening mammography, although they may have had clinical breast examinations and/or have been conducting breast self-examination.
Breast cancer mortality
There is Level 1 Canadian evidence that screening women between the ages of 40 and 49 years who are at average risk for breast cancer is not effective, and that the absence of a benefit is sustained over a maximum follow-up period of 16 years. All remaining studies that reported on women aged under 50 years were based on subset analyses. They provide additional evidence that, when all these RCTs are taken into account, there is no significant reduction in breast cancer mortality associated with screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years.
There is Level 1 evidence that screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer is not effective in reducing mortality. Moreover, risks associated with exposure to mammographic radiation, the increased risk of missed cancers due to lower mammographic sensitivity, and the psychological impact of false positives, are not inconsequential. The UK Age Trial results published in December 2006 did not change these conclusions.
本综述旨在确定乳腺钼靶筛查对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险女性的有效性。
乳腺钼靶筛查对50岁以上女性的有效性已得到证实,但40至49岁女性的筛查问题仍未解决。为所有省份制定乳腺钼靶筛查指南的加拿大预防服务工作组既不支持将40至49岁女性的这种筛查程序纳入定期健康检查,也不支持将其排除。除此之外,两项独立综述,一项于2005年在魁北克进行,另一项于2000年在艾伯塔进行,均得出结论,即缺乏令人信服的证据证明乳腺钼靶筛查对该年龄组患乳腺癌平均风险女性有效。在美国,各组织对于基于人群的乳腺钼靶筛查应从40岁还是50岁开始存在分歧。美国国立卫生研究院、美国癌症研究协会和美国家庭医师学会建议不对40多岁的女性进行筛查,而美国预防服务工作组、美国国立癌症研究所、美国癌症协会、美国放射学会以及美国妇产科医师学会则建议对40至49岁的女性进行乳腺钼靶筛查。此外,在比较加拿大和美国的筛查指南时,还必须认识到,像加拿大这样的社会化医疗体系中的“标准护理”与美国不同。在加拿大多个中心进行的一项随机筛查试验——国家乳腺筛查研究(NBSS - 1)表明,相对于标准护理(即研究开始时进行体格检查并教授乳房自我检查,此后接受常规社区护理),对年龄在40至49岁之间随机分组的女性进行年度乳腺钼靶检查,在降低乳腺癌死亡率方面并无益处。目前,加拿大的有组织筛查项目系统地从50岁开始对女性进行筛查,不过在安大略省,经医生转诊后,50岁以下女性的乳腺钼靶筛查属于保险服务项目。国际上对乳腺癌流行病学的估计表明,所有年龄段的乳腺癌发病率都在上升,而死亡率虽在下降,但速度较慢。这些死亡率的下降可能归因于筛查和乳腺癌治疗的进展。筛查导致的死亡率下降可能是由于浸润性癌症的早期发现和治疗,以及导管原位癌(DCIS)检测的增加,其中某些亚病理类型的致死性较低。美国监测、流行病学和最终结果(SEER)癌症登记处的证据表明,在20年时间里,DCIS的年龄调整发病率几乎增加了10倍(从每10万人2.7例增至25例)。40至49岁女性的乳腺癌发病率低于50至69岁的女性(分别约为每10万人140例和500例),乳腺钼靶检查的敏感度(50岁以下和50岁以上女性分别约为75%和85%)和特异度(50岁以下和50岁以上女性分别约为80%和90%)也是如此。年轻女性乳腺组织密度增加主要导致该检查在这个年龄组的准确性较低。此外,与50岁以后诊断出的乳腺癌相比,50岁之前发生的乳腺癌更可能与遗传易感性相关,因此乳腺钼靶检查可能不是年轻女性的最佳筛查方法。治疗方案因疾病阶段(基于肿瘤大小、周围组织受累情况以及腋窝淋巴结受累数量)及其病理类型而异,可能包括手术、化疗和/或放疗的联合应用。手术是活检确诊肿瘤的一线干预措施。后续放疗、化疗或激素治疗的使用取决于肿瘤的组织病理学特征和手术类型。对于非侵袭性的DCIS的最佳治疗方法存在争议。鉴于乳腺钼靶筛查的有效性存在争议,以及女性过度治疗或漏诊实际癌症的潜在风险,再加上10年期间每年接受乳腺钼靶检查导致的乳腺癌风险增加,安大略省卫生技术咨询委员会要求对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险女性的乳腺钼靶筛查进行本综述。本综述是两部分中的第一部分,重点关注乳腺钼靶筛查(即胶片乳腺钼靶,FM)对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险女性的有效性。第二部分将评估磁共振成像或数字乳腺钼靶筛查,目的是确定这些年轻女性的最佳筛查方式。
提出了以下问题:对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险的女性进行乳腺钼靶筛查是否能降低乳腺癌死亡率?该年龄组乳腺钼靶检查的敏感度和特异度是多少?40至49岁每年进行筛查有哪些风险?乳腺钼靶检查结果假阳性和假阴性有哪些风险?如果确定了有效性证据,经济方面的考虑因素有哪些?医学咨询秘书处按照其标准程序搜索了以下电子数据库:Ovid MEDLINE、EMBASE、Ovid MEDLINE在研及其他未索引引文、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库、Cochrane系统评价数据库以及国际卫生技术评估机构网络。搜索中使用的关键词为乳腺癌、乳腺肿瘤、群体筛查和乳腺钼靶检查。总共检索到6359篇关于乳腺癌筛查和乳腺钼靶检查的特定文章。这其中不包括诊断性乳腺钼靶检查的报告。搜索进一步限制为1995年至2005年发表的英文随机对照试验(RCT)、系统评价和荟萃分析。排除了病例报告、评论、社论和信件,结果将文章数量缩小至516篇以及之前的卫生技术政策评估报告。根据以下概述的标准对这些进行审查。这导致纳入了5项卫生技术评估、加拿大预防服务工作组报告、美国预防服务工作组报告、1篇Cochrane综述以及8项RCT。
1995年至2005年期间其他组织撰写的英文文章以及英文和法文卫生技术政策评估报告针对患乳腺癌平均风险女性的乳腺钼靶筛查RCT的特定文章,其中包括40至49岁随机分组女性的研究女性被随机分组接受或不接受乳腺钼靶筛查的研究,尽管女性可能已进行临床乳腺检查和/或可能一直在进行乳房自我检查2006年12月发表的英国年龄试验结果
观察性研究,包括嵌套在RCT中的研究不包括40至49岁随机分组女性结果的RCT将乳腺钼靶检查与其他放射学筛查方式(如数字乳腺钼靶、磁共振成像或超声)进行比较的研究随机分组的女性有乳腺癌个人病史的研究
胶片乳腺钼靶检查
在RCT中,对照组本应是随机分组不接受乳腺钼靶筛查的女性,尽管她们可能已进行临床乳腺检查和/或一直在进行乳房自我检查。
乳腺癌死亡率
有加拿大一级证据表明,对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险的女性进行筛查无效,且在最长16年的随访期内均未显示出益处。所有其他报告50岁以下女性情况的研究均基于亚组分析。它们提供了更多证据,即综合考虑所有这些RCT后,40至49岁女性进行乳腺钼靶筛查与乳腺癌死亡率显著降低无关。
有一级证据表明,对40至49岁患乳腺癌平均风险的女性进行乳腺钼靶筛查在降低死亡率方面无效。此外,与乳腺钼靶辐射暴露相关的风险、因乳腺钼靶敏感度较低导致癌症漏诊的风险增加以及假阳性的心理影响都并非无关紧要。2006年12月发表的英国年龄试验结果并未改变这些结论。