Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening revisited: a large, retrospective cross-sectional study quantifying treatment intensity in women with screen-detected versus non-screen-detected cancer in Australia and New Zealand.

Kathy Dempsey, Daniel Sj Costa, Meagan E Brennan, G Bruce Mann, Kylie L Snook, Andrew J Spillane
Author Information
  1. Kathy Dempsey: Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ORCID
  2. Daniel Sj Costa: Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ORCID
  3. Meagan E Brennan: Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ORCID
  4. G Bruce Mann: Department of Surgery, The University of Melbourne - Parkville Campus, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. ORCID
  5. Kylie L Snook: Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ORCID
  6. Andrew J Spillane: Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. ORCID

Abstract

Objectives: Non-mortality benefits of breast cancer screening are rarely considered in assessments of benefits versus harms. This study aims to estimate the rate of overdiagnosis in women with screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC) by allocating cases to either possibly overdiagnosed (POD) or not overdiagnosed categories and to compare treatment recommendations for surgery and adjuvant treatments by category, age at diagnosis and cancer stage.
Methods and analysis: Retrospective secondary analysis of 10 191 women diagnosed with breast cancer in Australia and New Zealand in 2018. Treatment recommendations for 5226 women with SDBC and 4965 women with non-SDBC (NSDBC) were collated and analysed. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate proportions and risk ratios (RRs).
Results: The POD rate was 15.8%. Screening detected 66.3% of stage 0 tumours, 59% of stage 1, 40% of stage 2 and 27.5% of stage 3 tumours. Women with SDBC were less likely than their NSDBC counterparts to receive chemotherapy (RR 0.60 Aus/0.53 NZ), immunotherapy (mostly human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor therapy) (RR 0.58 Aus/0.82 NZ), mastectomy (RR 0.55 Aus/0.63 NZ) and axillary lymph node dissection (RR 0.49 Aus/0.52 NZ), or to require both mastectomy and radiotherapy (RR 0.41 Aus/0.34 NZ). Less than 1% of POD women were recommended chemotherapy, 9.5% radiotherapy, 6.4% endocrine therapy, 2.2% mastectomy and 0.5% axillary lymph node dissection.
Conclusions: Women with SDBCs required less intensive treatment; rates of possible overtreatment of SDBCs are relatively low and may be minimised through multidisciplinary discussion and shared decision-making. Reduced treatment intensity should be considered when balancing the potential benefits and harms of screening.

Keywords

References

  1. BMJ. 2006 Mar 25;332(7543):689-92 [PMID: 16517548]
  2. Int J Cancer. 2021 Apr 19;: [PMID: 33872390]
  3. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 Jan;184(1):324-9 [PMID: 15615996]
  4. ANZ J Surg. 2015 May;85(5):315-20 [PMID: 25612239]
  5. J Med Screen. 2013 Jun;20(2):104-5 [PMID: 24065032]
  6. Cancer Med. 2023 Jan;12(2):1878-1887 [PMID: 35851849]
  7. Med J Aust. 2020 Mar;212(4):159-160 [PMID: 32030753]
  8. Public Health Res Pract. 2017 Jul 26;27(3): [PMID: 28765855]
  9. Cancer Causes Control. 2010 Feb;21(2):275-82 [PMID: 19894130]
  10. BMJ Open. 2021 Jun 22;11(6):e046353 [PMID: 34158298]
  11. Public Health Res Pract. 2019 Jul 31;29(2): [PMID: 31384884]
  12. N Engl J Med. 2015 Jun 11;372(24):2353-8 [PMID: 26039523]
  13. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Sep;25(9):2563-2572 [PMID: 29717421]
  14. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2008 Dec;134(12):1311-8 [PMID: 18504613]
  15. BMJ. 2009 Jul 09;339:b1425 [PMID: 19589820]
  16. BMJ. 1997 Jun 14;314(7096):1762-3 [PMID: 9202520]
  17. ANZ J Surg. 2001 Jul;71(7):398-402 [PMID: 11450913]
  18. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Dec;28(Suppl 3):878 [PMID: 33997922]
  19. BMJ. 2009 Jul 09;339:b2587 [PMID: 19589821]
  20. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2016 Sep;28(9):594-6 [PMID: 27342951]
  21. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Nov;172(1):191-199 [PMID: 30046938]
  22. Lancet Oncol. 2016 Jan;17(1):109-14 [PMID: 26655422]
  23. BMJ. 2015 Mar 03;350:h867 [PMID: 25736426]
  24. N Engl J Med. 2023 Aug 17;389(7):612-619 [PMID: 37585627]
  25. Br J Cancer. 2013 Jun 11;108(11):2205-40 [PMID: 23744281]
  26. Br J Cancer. 2011 Nov 22;105(11):1669-75 [PMID: 22052156]
  27. JAMA Oncol. 2015 Oct;1(7):888-96 [PMID: 26291673]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0cancer0womenbreaststageRRAus/0NZscreeningtreatmentbenefitsharmsSDBCPOD25%mastectomyconsideredversusstudyratescreen-detectedoverdiagnosedrecommendationsAustraliaNewZealandNSDBCtumoursWomenlesschemotherapytherapyaxillarylymphnodedissectionradiotherapySDBCsintensityoncologyObjectives:Non-mortalityrarelyassessmentsaimsestimateoverdiagnosisallocatingcaseseitherpossiblycategoriescomparesurgeryadjuvanttreatmentscategoryagediagnosisMethodsanalysis:Retrospectivesecondaryanalysis10191diagnosed2018Treatment52264965non-SDBCcollatedanalysedDescriptivestatisticsusedcalculateproportionsriskratiosRRsResults:158%Screeningdetected663%59%140%273likelycounterpartsreceive6053immunotherapymostlyhumanepidermalgrowthfactorreceptor588255634952require4134Less1%recommended964%endocrine2%Conclusions:requiredintensiveratespossibleovertreatmentrelativelylowmayminimisedmultidisciplinarydiscussionshareddecision-makingReducedbalancingpotentialBenefitsrevisited:largeretrospectivecross-sectionalquantifyingnon-screen-detectedfemaleepidemiologymedicalsurgical

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.