Performance of screening mammography in organized programs in Canada in 1996. The Database Management Subcommittee to the National Committee for the Canadian Breast Cancer Screening Initiative.
The results of randomized trials show that breast cancer screening by mammography reduces breast cancer mortality by up to 40% in women aged 50-69 years. Because of these results, by 1998, 22 countries, including Canada, had established population-based organized screening programs. This paper presents the results of screening mammography in 1996 for 7 provincially organized breast cancer screening programs in Canada.
Analyses of interim performance indicators for screening mammography have been calculated from data submitted to the Canadian Breast Cancer Screening database. The data set consisted of data from 7 provincial programs and was limited to mammographic screens for women aged 50-69 years (n = 203,303). Screening outcomes and performance indicators were calculated for abnormalities detected by screening mammography only.
The abnormal recall rate was 9.5% for first screens and 4.6% for subsequent screens, and the cancer detection rate per 1000 women screened was 6.9 for first screens and 3.8 for subsequent screens. The positive predictive value (i.e., the proportion of women who tested positive by mammography who were found to have breast cancer on screen-initiated diagnostic work-up) increased from 7.2% at the first screen to 8.2% at subsequent screens. Estimated participation rates within organized programs varied from 10.6% to 54.2%, depending on the province.
For 1996, organized breast cancer screening programs met or exceeded many of the interim measures used in international programs. It is possible to translate the benefits of breast cancer screening by mammography, as demonstrated in randomized trials, into population-based community programs. Screening mammography through organized programs should increase to allow more comprehensive monitoring in Canada.
Notes
Cites: Cancer Detect Prev. 1997;21(3):213-209167038
Cites: Int J Cancer. 1998 Mar 2;75(5):694-89495236
Cites: Aust N Z J Surg. 1998 Jun;68(6):415-89623460
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;(22):151-69709292
Cites: J Med Screen. 1998;5(2):73-809718525
Cites: Int J Epidemiol. 1998 Oct;27(5):735-429839727
Cites: Radiology. 1999 May;211(2):529-3310228538
Cites: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1999 Mar;54(1):73-8110369083
Cites: Prev Med. 1999 Jul;29(1):22-710419795
Cites: Eur J Cancer Prev. 1999 Oct;8(5):417-2610548397
Cites: J Natl Cancer Inst. 1982 Aug;69(2):349-556955542
Cites: Lancet. 1985 Apr 13;1(8433):829-322858707
Cites: Br J Cancer. 1989 Jun;59(6):954-82736233
Cites: Radiol Clin North Am. 1992 Jan;30(1):187-2101732926
Cites: Radiology. 1993 Sep;188(3):811-68351353
Cites: Cancer Detect Prev. 1993;17(4-5):513-208242651
Cites: Radiology. 1994 Nov;193(2):351-77972742
Cites: JAMA. 1995 Jan 11;273(2):149-547799496
Cites: Radiology. 1996 Jan;198(1):125-308539363
Cites: J Med Screen. 1995;2(4):186-908719146
Comment In: CMAJ. 2000 Oct 31;163(9):1150-111079061