Single-view screening mammography: psychological, endocrine and immunological effects of recalling for a complete three-view examination

The Adequacy of Measurement of Short and Long-Term Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography

Objectives:

The aim of this study is to review quantitative studies on women's experiences of consequences of false-positive screening mammography to assess the adequacy of the most frequently used instruments for measuring short-term and long-term psychological consequences.

Methods:

Relevant papers reporting quantitative studies on consequences of false-positive screening mammography were identified using MEDLlNE, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycInfo databases. Articles citing development and psychometric properties of the most frequently used measures were also retrieved. Finally, the review focused on studies that had used at least one of the most frequently used measures.

Results:

Twenty-three relevant studies were identified. The most commonly used measures were the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ) and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). One or more of these was used in 17 of the 23 studies.

Conclusions:

The GHQ, the HADS and the STAI have problems with language, content relevance, and content coverage in studies of false-positive screening mammography. These instruments should not be used to measure psychological consequences of any kind of cancer screening. The PCQ is an adequate questionnaire for measuring short-term consequences, and the PCQ is preferable to other measures because of its higher sensitivity. However, there is little evidence that the PCQ is able to adequately detect all long-term consequences of screening mammography. Given the inadequacy of the measurement instruments used, any current conclusions about the long-term consequences of false-positive results of screening mammography must remain tentative.

Harms of Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation

BACKGROUND

In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years.

PURPOSE

To review studies of screening in average-risk women with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasonography that reported on false-positive results, overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and Cochrane databases through December 2014.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language systematic reviews, randomized trials, and observational studies of screening.

DATA EXTRACTION

Investigators extracted and confirmed data from studies and dual-rated study quality. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Based on 2 studies of U.S. data, 10-year cumulative rates of false-positive mammography results and biopsies were higher with annual than biennial screening (61% vs. 42% and 7% vs. 5%, respectively) and for women aged 40 to 49 years, those with dense breasts, and those using combination hormone therapy. Twenty-nine studies using different methods reported overdiagnosis rates of 0% to 54%; rates from randomized trials were 11% to 22%. Women with false-positive results reported more anxiety, distress, and breast cancer-specific worry, although results varied across 80 observational studies. Thirty-nine observational studies indicated that some women reported pain during mammography (1% to 77%); of these, 11% to 46% declined future screening. Models estimated 2 to 11 screening-related deaths from radiation-induced cancer per 100,000 women using digital mammography, depending on age and screening interval. Five observational studies of tomosynthesis and mammography indicated increased biopsies but reduced recalls compared with mammography alone.

LIMITATIONS

Studies of overdiagnosis were highly heterogeneous, and estimates varied depending on the analytic approach. Studies of anxiety and pain used different outcome measures. Radiation exposure was based on models.

CONCLUSION

False-positive results are common and are higher for annual screening, younger women, and women with dense breasts. Although overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure may cause harm, their effects on individual women are difficult to estimate and vary widely.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review

Concerns have been raised regarding the possible negative psychological impact of the cancer screening programmes offered in the UK. This review aims to assess the extent of and factors associated with the adverse psychological consequences of mammographic screening. Fifty-four papers from 13 countries were identified, a majority of which were published after 1990, coinciding more or less with the onset of routine mammographic screening. The results report that mammographic screening does not appear to create anxiety in women who are given a clear result after a mammogram and are subsequently placed on routine recall. However, women who have further investigations following their routine mammogram experience significant anxiety in the short term, and possibly in the long term. The nature and extent of the further investigation that women are exposed to during mammographic screening determines the intensity of the psychological impact. Factors associated with the adverse psychological impact of mammographic screening included: social demographic factors of younger age, lower education, living in urban areas, manual occupation, and one or no children; cancer screening factors of dissatisfaction with information and communication during screening process, waiting time between recall letter and recall appointment, pain experienced during the mammographic screening procedures, and previous false positive result; and cancer worry factors including fear of cancer and greater perceived risk of breast cancer. Difficulties in measuring the psychological impact of screening are discussed, and methods of alleviating the negative psychological outcomes are suggested.

Short-term impact of cancer prevention and screening activities on quality of life

PURPOSE

There are few data on the short-term effects of participating in cancer prevention activities, undergoing genetic risk assessment, or having routine screening. The objective of this article is to systematically review existing research on short-term effects of prevention, genetic counseling and testing, and screening activities on quality of life.

METHODS

We conducted a MEDLINE search for original research studies that were published between January 1, 1985, and December 31, 2002, and conducted in North America or Western Europe. Data were abstracted and summarized using a standardized format.

RESULTS

We reviewed 210 publications. Most studies focused on psychological states (anxiety, depression), symptoms, or general health status. One hundred thirty-one studies used 51 previously validated noncancer instruments. Many researchers (12.6%) also added cancer-specific measures, such as perceived cancer risk or symptom indices. Only one study measured satisfaction or quality of provider-client communication. While one report examined lost workdays, no other economic consequences of short-term outcomes were evaluated. Among seven studies that assessed short-term outcomes preferences, only four specifically used time trade-off or linear rating scale methods. No study used standard gamble or willingness-to-pay methods. The overwhelming majority of research indicated that short-term effects were transient. Only two studies linked short-term effects to long-term cancer-related health behaviors such as repeat screening.

CONCLUSION

There is considerable heterogeneity in short-term outcome measurement. Clinicians need to be aware of potential for short-term, transient adverse effects. The impact of short-term experiences should to be linked to long-term health status and use of services.

Mammographic screening under age 50: a review

Trials indicate that screening women between 40 and 49 with mammography results in a clear mortality benefit. Whether this is worth the side-effects and financial cost is a matter of judgement. Some national health authorities and several other bodies consider the balance favourable enough to recommend general screening for this age group.

The minimization to clients of screen-detected breast cancer: a qualitative analysis

Previous research has shown a low incidence of psychological morbidity in women with screen-detected breast cancer when compared to women with symptomatic breast cancer. Farmer et al. suggested that this might be due to the way the diagnosis of breast cancer is given to women with screen-detected disease. In order to test this hypothesis a detailed, in-depth, qualitative study was undertaken. The sample consisted of women with symptomatic breast cancer (n=5), women with screen-detected invasive breast cancer (n=6) and women with screen-detected in-situ breast cancer (n=5). The 'bad news consultations' with the surgeons, and subsequent meetings with the breast care nurses (BCN), were tape recorded. The women were also interviewed in their own homes within 7 days. The results suggested that the women with screen-detected breast cancer received more reassurance than the women with symptomatic breast cancer and that the benefits of breast screening were emphasized by the surgeons and the BCNs. This led to minimization of the significance of screen-detected disease. Women were found to draw on a new conceptual model of early curable breast cancer which appears to be associated with a low incidence of psychological morbidity.

Screening for early detection of cancer--ethical aspects

Ethical principles to be followed in cancer screening programmes are intended mainly to minimize unnecessary harm for the participating individuals. The principles that have been recommended by the Council of Europe, Committee of Ministers are: 1) Effectiveness is a necessary prerequisite for a screening activity to be ethical. 2) The need for a balance between the advantages and disadvantages of screening for a target population and an individual, between social and economic costs, equity and individual rights and freedoms. 3) The need for information about both the positive and the negative aspects of a screening programme. 4) The decision to participate in a screening programme or in research should be taken freely. 5) The right to integrity, i.e., the results of the tests are not communicated to those who do not wish to be informed, and the need to have laws and regulations on any communication of personal data derived from screening to third parties.

The Stockholm Mammographic Screening Trial: Risks and benefits in age group 40-49 years

This article presents updated data on breast cancer mortality for women under age 50 from the Stockholm Mammographic Screening Trial, as well as a review of some side effects associated with screening in this age group. Approximately 40,000 women aged 40-64 (14,842 aged 40-49 years) were randomized to a trial of breast cancer screening by single-view mammography alone; 20,000 women (7,103 aged 10-49) were randomized to a control group. In the 40-49 age group, 24 and 12 breast cancer deaths were found in the study and control groups, respectively, after 11.4 years of follow-up. The relative risk of breast cancer death in screened to nonscreened women was 1.08 (95% confidence interval: 0.54-2.17). The rates of benign surgical biopsies, false positives, and follow-up costs were higher among women under age 50. Large overview studies are needed, however, to determine whether mammography screening consistently reduces mortality in women 40-49 years of age. Side effects such as costs and public aspects of mammography screening in this age group also warrant further study.

The psychosocial consequences of mammography

Increasing numbers of mammograms being performed in the United States will be accompanied inevitably by an increasing number of false positives. According to reliable estimates from a survey of radiology facilities, U.S. women in their forties experience close to one million false positive mammograms every year. To determine the impact of false positive mammograms and the broader psychological impact of mammography, we conducted literature searches of Medline, CancerLit, and PsycInfo. We identified nine studies examining the impact of false positive mammograms. Most found short-term increases in such psychological measures as anxiety, distress, and intrusive thoughts. One study found substantial effects on these measures three months after an abnormal mammogram. Another study found an 18-month impact on anxiety. Few studies have used behavioral outcomes, but one reported overpractice of breast self-exam among women who had received false positive results. Another found no reduction in adherence to mammography among women who have had an abnormal test. The more general mammography literature suggests that many women are anxious about mammography before the exam; women with lower levels of education, African Americans, and women with a family history of breast cancer may be more vulnerable to distress. Unfortunately, this literature suffers major limitations, such as small sample sizes, inconsistent and sometimes inappropriate measures, variations in the time frames for measurement, few studies with women aged 40-49, and a paucity of U.S. research. More research is needed to characterize at-risk women and to test interventions designed to reduce the negative impact of abnormal mammograms. Improved communication is also needed throughout the entire mammography process.

Controversies in screening with mammography

Screening with mammography in order to detect early curable breast cancer has been widely used during the last 2-3 decades. Especially an overview of 4 randomised trials in Sweden has shown a convincing short-term relative reduction of the breast cancer mortality while the long-term absolute effect on this mortality has been impossible to study due to screening of the control groups after some years. There is, however, rather general consensus about the value of screening in women above 50 years of age whereas screening in the age group 40-49 is still controversial due to the low rate of mammographically demonstrable cancers and the high rate of recalls for supplementary mammography, clinical examinations and biopsies in relation to cancers found. Recent follow-up of the pooled Swedish randomised trials have shown an about 20% almost significant reduction of the breast cancer mortality in women aged 40-49 at randomisation but the design of these trials does not allow an adequate estimation of the extra benefit obtained by starting periodical screening at age 40 instead of at age 50. The author proposes that screening in the age group 40-49 should be regarded as experimental and subject to proper randomised trials of a type on-going in UK and planned within UICC.

Followup after 11 years--update of mortality results in the Stockholm mammographic screening trial

Results from several randomised mammography screening trials have shown that it is possible to reduce mortality in breast cancer by mammographic screening at least for women above 50 years of age. The purpose of this article is to present data on mortality in breast cancer in study and control groups of the Stockholm trial after 11 years of followup, to analyse which age group benefits most from screening. In March 1981, 40,318 women in Stockholm, aged 40 through 64 years, entered a randomized trial of breast cancer screening by single view mammography alone, versus no intervention in a control group of 20,000 women. Two screening rounds were performed and the attendance rate was over 80% in the two rounds. During 1986 the control group was invited once to screening. Totally 428 and 217 cases of breast cancer were diagnosed in the study and control groups respectively. After a mean follow-up of 11.4 years a nonsignificant mortality reduction of 26% was observed for the whole study group, with a relative risk (RR) of death in breast cancer of 0.74 (CI(confidence interval) = 0.5-1.1). For women aged 50-64 years a significant 38% mortality reduction was observed with a RR of 0.62 (CI = 0.38-1.0). For women aged 40-49 years no effect on mortality was found, with a RR of death in breast cancer of 1.08 (CI = 0.54-2.17). The breakpoint for benefit in this study seemed to be at 50 years of age when 5-year age groups were analysed, but this tendency is uncertain because of the low statistical power in the analysis of the younger age groups. Long screening intervals, the use of single-view mammography, and the fact that more than 50% of the women in age group 40-49 years were still below 50 years of age when the study was closed, were all facts that could have influenced the results in age group 40-49 years. Larger studies are needed to answer the question whether mammographic screening can be successful in younger age groups.