Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Sep 13.
Published in final edited form as: Ann Intern Med. 2013 Apr 16;158(8):580–587. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-8-201304160-00002

Table 4.

Adjusted Associations Between CAD Use and Nonuse and Invasive Breast Cancer Stage, Size, and Lymph Node Status*

Outcome Adjusted OR Associated
With CAD Use vs
Nonuse (95% CI)
P Value
Stage (n = 30 681)

  Stage I (vs. II, III, or IV) 1.15 (1.09–1.22) <0.001

  Stages I or II (vs. III or IV) 1.27 (1.14–1.41) <0.001
Size (n = 31 071)

  Size <1 cm (vs. ≥1 cm) 1.10 (1.04–1.16) <0.001

  Size <2 cm (vs. ≥2 cm) 1.18 (1.10–1.25) <0.001
Lymph node status (n = 28 237)

  Negative (vs. positive) 1.15 (1.08–1.24) <0.001

CAD = computer-aided detection; OR = odds ratio.

*

Adjusted for age, race or ethnicity, rural vs. urban residence, median income of elderly residents within the same ZIP code, time since previous mammogram, use of CAD on the previous examination, presence of stable and unstable comorbid conditions, digital vs. film mammography, year of examination, and SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results) region. Sample sizes differ from the total number of invasive cancer cases (n = 36 270) because of missing or unknown stage, size, or node status or missing covariates.