Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique logoLink to Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique
editorial
. 2012 Nov 1;103(6):e417–e419. doi: 10.1007/BF03405629

Optimizing Canadian Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Perspective for Action

Andriana Barisic 16, Sharareh Taghipour 26,36,✉, Dragan Banjevic 36, Anthony B Miller 16, Neil Montgomery 36, Andrew Jardine 36, Bart J Harvey 16
PMCID: PMC6975208  PMID: 23618019

Abstract

While controversies regarding optimal breast cancer screening modalities, screening start and end ages, and screening frequencies continue to exist, additional population-based randomized trials are unlikely to be initiated to examine these concerns. Simulation models have been used to evaluate the efficacy and effectiveness of various breast cancer screening strategies, however these models were all developed using US data. Currently, there is a need to examine the optimal screening and treatment policies in the Canadian context. In this commentary, we discuss the current controversies pertaining to breast cancer screening, and describe the fundamental components of a simulation model, which can be used to inform breast cancer screening and treatment policies.

Key words: Breast cancer, screening controversies, screening strategies, simulation, model components

Footnotes

Conflict of Interest: None to declare.

References

  • 1.Canadian Cancer Society Steering Committee on Cancer Statistics. Canadian Cancer Statisticis 2011. Toronto, ON: Canadian Cancer Society; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Yen MF, Chiang CF, et al. The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin N Am. 2000;384:625–51. doi: 10.1016/S0033-8389(05)70191-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Humphrey L, Helfand M, Chan BKS, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: A summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;1375:347–60. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-5_Part_1-200209030-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hendrick RE, Smith RA, Rutledge J, Smart CR. Benefit of screening mam-mography in women aged 40–49: A new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:87–92. doi: 10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrock C, Ernster VL. Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. JAMA. 1995;2732:149–54. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03520260071035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, Landberg T, Lindholm K, Linell F, et al. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: The Malmö mammographic screening trial. Br Med J. 1988;2976654:943–48. doi: 10.1136/bmj.297.6654.943. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J. Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: Updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;3599310:909–19. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08020-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Cox B. Variation in the effectiveness of breast screening by year of follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;199722:69–72. doi: 10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Berry DA. Benefits and risks of screening mammography for women in their forties: A statistical appraisal. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;9019:1431–39. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.19.1431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 11.Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen TH, Yen AM, Cohen A, Tot T, et al. Swedish two-county trial: Impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology. 2011;2603:658–63. doi: 10.1148/radiol.11110469. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50-–59 years. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;9218:1490–99. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.18.1490. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, Johns L, Waller M, Bobrow L. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years’ follow-up: A randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;3689552:2053–60. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69834-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Study-1: Breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up. A randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137(5Part1):305–12. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-137-5_Part_1-200209030-00005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40–74 years. CMAJ. 2011;18317:1991–2001. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.110334. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lee S, Zelen M. A stochastic model for predicting the mortality of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:79–86. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.van Tan SY, de Oortmarssen GJ, Koning HJ, Boer R, Habbema JD. The MIS-CAN-Fadia continuous tumor growth model for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:56–65. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Mandelblatt J, Schechter CB, Lawrence W, Yi B, Cullen J. The SPECTRUM population model of the impact of screening and treatment on U.S. breast cancer trends from 1975 to 2000: Principles and practice of the model methods. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:47–55. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Berry DA, Inoue L, Shen Y, Venier J, Cohen D, Bondy M, et al. Modeling the impact of treatment and screening on U.S. breast cancer mortality: A Bayesian approach. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:30–36. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Plevritis SK, Sigal BM, Salzman P, Rosenberg PG. A stochastic simulation model of U.S. breast cancer mortality trends from 1975 to 2000. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:86–95. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Fryback DG, Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, Trentham-Dietz A, Kuruchittham V, Remington PL. The Wisconsin Breast Cancer Epidemiology Simulation Model. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2006;36:37–47. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgj007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hunter DJ, Drake SM, Shortt SE, Dorland JL, Tran N. Simulation modeling of change to breast cancer detection age eligibility recommendations in Ontario, 2002–2021. Cancer Detect Prev. 2004;286:453–60. doi: 10.1016/j.cdp.2004.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Ahern CH, Shen Y. Cost-effectiveness analysis of mammography and clinical breast examination strategies: A comparison with current guidelines. Cancer Epidemiol Biomar. 2009;183:718–25. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0918. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kolb T, Lichy J, Newhouse J. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: An analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002;225:165–75. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2251011667. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Early Breast Cancer Trialist’s Collaborative Group. Systemic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy: 133 randomized trials involving 31,000 recurrences and 24,000 deaths among 75,000 women. Lancet. 1992;3398784:1–15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Early Breast Cancer Trialist’s Collaborative Group. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: An overview of the randomized trials. Lancet. 1998;3519114:1451–67. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Early Breast Cancer Trialist’s Collaborative Group. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: An overview of the randomized trials. Lancet. 1998;3529132:930–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.McPake B, Kumaranayake L, Normand C. Health Economics: An International Perspective. London, UK: Routledge; 2002. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien B, Stoddart G. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2005. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Warwick J, Duffy SW. A review of cancer screening evaluation techniques, with some particular examples in breast cancer screening. J Roy Stat Soc A STA. 2005;168(Part4):657–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00371.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES