Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 1996 Feb;50(1):68–71. doi: 10.1136/jech.50.1.68

Age specific sensitivity and sojourn time in a breast cancer screening programme (DOM) in The Netherlands: a comparison of different methods.

C T Brekelmans 1, P Westers 1, J A Faber 1, P H Peeters 1, H J Collette 1
PMCID: PMC1060207  PMID: 8762357

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To estimate age dependent sensitivity and sojourn time in a breast cancer screening programme by different methods. POPULATION AND METHODS: The study population comprised women participating in the DOM project--the Utrecht screening programme for the early detection of breast cancer. Breast cancer screening prevalence data and incidence rates after a negative screen were used to estimate age specific sensitivity and mean sojourn time by different methods. MAIN RESULTS: Maximum likelihood estimates of the mean sojourn time varied from one year for women aged 40-49 years to three years for women over the age of 54. Sensitivity was calculated by two different methods. Both pointed to a high sensitivity (around 100%) in the age groups 40-49 and over 55 years. For women aged 50-54, the sensitivity varied from 63% to 100%, depending on the method used and the value of the baseline incidence rate. CONCLUSIONS: Different methods of estimating sensitivity pointed at an acceptable level in women over and under 50 years of age. Sojourn time, and thus the tumour growth rate, seemed to be age dependent. This could mean that the until now disappointing screening results in women under 50 years of age are not so much a result of low sensitivity as of a relatively high tumour growth rate in younger women.

Full text

PDF

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Brekelmans C. T., Collette H. J., Collette C., Fracheboud J., de Waard F. Breast cancer after a negative screen: follow-up of women participating in the DOM Screening Programme. Eur J Cancer. 1992;28A(4-5):893–895. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(92)90144-q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Collette H. J., Day N. E., Rombach J. J., de Waard F. Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in a non-randomised study (the DOM project) by means of a case-control study. Lancet. 1984 Jun 2;1(8388):1224–1226. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)91704-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Day N. E. Estimating the sensitivity of a screening test. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1985 Dec;39(4):364–366. doi: 10.1136/jech.39.4.364. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Day N. E., Walter S. D. Simplified models of screening for chronic disease: estimation procedures from mass screening programmes. Biometrics. 1984 Mar;40(1):1–14. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fletcher S. W., Black W., Harris R., Rimer B. K., Shapiro S. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1644–1656. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.20.1644. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Miller A. B., Baines C. J., To T., Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years. CMAJ. 1992 Nov 15;147(10):1459–1476. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Miller A. B. Mammography screening guidelines for women 40 to 49 and over 65 years old. Ann Epidemiol. 1994 Mar;4(2):96–101. doi: 10.1016/1047-2797(94)90053-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Moskowitz M. Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies. Radiology. 1986 Oct;161(1):37–41. doi: 10.1148/radiology.161.1.3532183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Moss S. M., Coleman D. A., Ellman R., Chamberlain J., Forrest A. P., Kirkpatrick A. E., Thomas B. A., Price J. L. Interval cancers and sensitivity in the screening centres of the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1993;29A(2):255–258. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(93)90187-k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Nyström L., Rutqvist L. E., Wall S., Lindgren A., Lindqvist M., Rydén S., Andersson I., Bjurstam N., Fagerberg G., Frisell J. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 1993 Apr 17;341(8851):973–978. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(93)91067-v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Paci E., Duffy S. W. Modelling the analysis of breast cancer screening programmes: sensitivity, lead time and predictive value in the Florence District Programme (1975-1986). Int J Epidemiol. 1991 Dec;20(4):852–858. doi: 10.1093/ije/20.4.852. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Peer P. G., Holland R., Hendriks J. H., Mravunac M., Verbeek A. L. Age-specific effectiveness of the Nijmegen population-based breast cancer-screening program: assessment of early indicators of screening effectiveness. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994 Mar 16;86(6):436–441. doi: 10.1093/jnci/86.6.436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Peer P. G., van Dijck J. A., Hendriks J. H., Holland R., Verbeek A. L. Age-dependent growth rate of primary breast cancer. Cancer. 1993 Jun 1;71(11):3547–3551. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930601)71:11<3547::aid-cncr2820711114>3.0.co;2-c. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Spratt J. S., Greenberg R. A., Heuser L. S. Geometry, growth rates, and duration of cancer and carcinoma in situ of the breast before detection by screening. Cancer Res. 1986 Feb;46(2):970–974. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Tabàr L., Fagerberg G., Duffy S. W., Day N. E., Gad A., Gröntoft O. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 1992 Jan;30(1):187–210. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Tabár L., Faberberg G., Day N. E., Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987 May;55(5):547–551. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1987.112. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Walter S. D., Day N. E. Estimation of the duration of a pre-clinical disease state using screening data. Am J Epidemiol. 1983 Dec;118(6):865–886. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Whitehead J., Cooper J. Risk factors for breast cancer by mode of diagnosis: some results from a breast cancer screening study. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1989 Jun;43(2):115–120. doi: 10.1136/jech.43.2.115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES