Effect of second timed appointments for non-attenders of breast cancer screening in England : a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: In England, participation in breast cancer screening has been decreasing in the past 10 years, approaching the national minimum standard of 70%. Interventions aimed at improving participation need to be investigated and put into practice to stop this downward trend. We assessed the effect on participation of sending invitations for breast screening with a timed appointment to women who did not attend their first offered appointment within the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). METHODS: In this open, randomised controlled trial, women in six centres in the NHSBSP in England who were invited for routine breast cancer screening were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive an invitation to a second appointment with fixed date and time (intervention) or an invitation letter with a telephone number to call to book their new screening appointment (control) in the event of non-attendance at the first offered appointment. Randomisation was by SX number, a sequential unique identifier of each woman within the NHSBSP, and at the beginning of the study a coin toss decided whether women with odd or even SX numbers would be allocated to the intervention group. Women aged 50-70 years who did not attend their first offered appointment were eligible for the analysis. The primary endpoint was participation (ie, attendance at breast cancer screening) within 90 days of the date of the first offered appointment; we used Poisson regression to compare the proportion of women who participated in screening in the study groups. All analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Barts Health, number 009304QM. FINDINGS: We obtained 33 146 records of women invited for breast cancer screening at the six centres between June 2, 2014, and Sept 30, 2015, who did not attend their first offered appointment. 26 054 women were eligible for this analysis (12 807 in the intervention group and 13 247 in the control group). Participation within 90 days of the first offered appointment was significantly higher in the intervention group (2861 [22%] of 12 807) than in the control group (1632 [12%] of 13 247); relative risk of participation 1·81 (95% CI 1·70-1·93; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: These findings show that a policy of second appointments with fixed date and time for non-attenders of breast screening is effective in improving participation. This strategy can be easily implemented by the screening sites and, if combined with simple interventions, could further increase participation and ensure an upward shift in the participation trend nationally. Whether the policy should vary by time since last attended screen will have to be considered. FUNDING: National Health Service Cancer Screening Programmes and Department of Health Policy Research Programme

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic density has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of breast cancer and a causative factor in reducing the sensitivity of mammography. There remain questions as to the use of mammographic density information in the context of screening and risk management, and of the association with cancer in populations known to be at increased risk of breast cancer. AIM: To assess the association of breast density with presence of cancer by measuring mammographic density visually as a percentage, and with two automated volumetric methods, Quantra™ and VolparaDensity™. METHODS: The TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY (TOMMY) study of digital breast tomosynthesis in the Breast Screening Programme of the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom (UK) included 6020 breast screening assessment cases (of whom 1158 had breast cancer) and 1040 screened women with a family history of breast cancer (of whom two had breast cancer). We assessed the association of each measure with breast cancer risk in these populations at enhanced risk, using logistic regression adjusted for age and total breast volume as a surrogate for body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: All density measures showed a positive association with presence of cancer and all declined with age. The strongest effect was seen with Volpara absolute density, with a significant 3% (95% CI 1-5%) increase in risk per 10 cm3 of dense tissue. The effect of Volpara volumetric density on risk was stronger for large and grade 3 tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Automated absolute breast density is a predictor of breast cancer risk in populations at enhanced risk due to either positive mammographic findings or family history. In the screening context, density could be a trigger for more intensive imaging

A randomised trial of the effect of postal reminders on attendance for breast screening

This study was supported financially by National Cancer Screening Programmes. Stephen Duffy contributed to this study as part of the programme of the Policy Reminders and breast screening attendance BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER www.bjcancer.com | DOI:10.1038/bjc.2015.451 175 Research Unit in Cancer Awareness, Screening and Early Diagnosis, which receives funding for a research programme from the Department of Health Policy Research Programme, grant number 106/0001. It is a collaboration between researchers from seven institutions (Queen Mary University of London, UCL, King’s College London, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Hull York Medical School, Durham University and Peninsula Medical School

Mammographic surveillance in women younger than 50 years who have a family history of breast cancer: tumour characteristics and projected effect on mortality in the prospective, single-arm, FH01 study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supports a reduction in mortality from breast cancer with mammographic screening in the general population of women aged 40-49 years, but the effect of family history is not clear. We aimed to establish whether screening affects the disease stage and projected mortality of women younger than 50 years who have a clinically significant family history of breast cancer. METHODS: In the single-arm FH01 study, women at intermediate familial risk who were younger than 50 years were enrolled from 76 centres in the UK, and received yearly mammography. Women with BRCA mutations were not explicitly excluded, but would be rare in this group. To compare the FH01 cohort with women not receiving screening, two external comparison groups were used: the control group of the UK Age Trial (106,971 women aged 40-42 years at recruitment, from the general population [ie, average risk], followed up for 10 years), and a Dutch study of women with a family history of breast cancer (cancer cases aged 25-77 years, diagnosed 1980-2004). Study endpoints were size, node status, and histological grade of invasive tumours, and estimated mortality calculated from the Nottingham prognostic index (NPI) score, and adjusted for differences in underlying risk between the FH01 cohort and the control group of the UK Age Trial. This study is registered with the National Research Register, number N0484114809. FINDINGS: 6710 women were enrolled between Jan 16, 2003, and Feb 28, 2007, and received yearly mammography for a mean of 4 years (SD 2) up until Nov 30, 2009; surveillance and reporting of cancers is still underway. 136 women were diagnosed with breast cancer: 105 (77%) at screening, 28 (21%) symptomatically in the interval between screening events, and three (2%) symptomatically after failing to attend their latest mammogram. Invasive tumours in the FH01 study were significantly smaller (p=0·0094), less likely to be node positive (p=0·0083), and of more favourable grade (p=0·0072) than were those in the control group of the UK Age Trial, and were significantly less likely to be node positive than were tumours in the Dutch study (p=0·012). Mean NPI score was significantly lower in the FH01 cohort than in the control group of the UK Age Trial (p=0·00079) or the Dutch study (p<0·0001). After adjustment for underlying risk, predicted 10-year mortality was significantly lower in the FH01 cohort (1·10%) than in the control group of the UK Age Trial (1·38%), with relative risk of 0·80 (95% CI 0·66-0·96; p=0·022). INTERPRETATION: Yearly mammography in women with a medium familial risk of breast cancer is likely to be effective in prevention of deaths from breast cancer