Socioeconomic inequalities in attending the mass screening for breast cancer in the south of the Netherlands-associations with stage at diagnosis and survival

International audienceThe associations of socioeconomic status (SES) and participation in the breast cancer screening program, as well as consequences for stage of disease and prognosis were studied in the Netherlands, where no financial barriers for participating or health care use exist. From 1998 to 2005, 1,067,952 invitations for biennial mammography were sent to women aged 50-75 in the region covered by the Eindhoven Cancer Registry. Screening attendance rates according to SES were calculated. Tumor stage and survival were studied according to SES group for patients diagnosed with breast cancer between 1998 and 2006, whether screen-detected, interval carcinoma or not attended screening at all. Attendance rates were rather high: 79, 85 and 87% in women with low, intermediate and high SES ( < 0.001), respectively. Compared to the low SES group, odds ratios for attendance were 1.5 (95%CI:1.5-1.6) for the intermediate SES group and 1.8 (95%CI:1.7-1.8) for the high SES group. Moreover, women with low SES had an unfavorable tumor-node-metastasis stage compared to those with high SES. This was seen in non-attendees, among women with interval cancers and with screen-detected cancers. Among non-attendees and interval cancers, the socioeconomic survival disparities were largely explained by stage distribution (48 and 35%) and to a lesser degree by therapy (16 and 16%). Comorbidity explained most survival inequalities among screen-detected patients (23%). Despite the absence of financial barriers for participation in the Dutch mass-screening program, socioeconomic inequalities in attendance rates exist, and women with low SES had a significantly worse tumor stage and lower survival rate

The dilemma of recalling well-circumscribed masses in a screening population: A narrative literature review and exploration of Dutch screening practice.

BACKGROUND: In Dutch breast cancer screening, solitary, new or growing well-circumscribed masses should be recalled for further assessment. This results in cancers detected but also in false positive recalls, especially at initial screening. The aim of this study was to determine characteristics of well-circumscribed masses at mammography and identify potential methods to improve the recall strategy. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed. In addition, follow-up data were retrieved on all 8860 recalled women in a Dutch screening region from 2014 to 2019. RESULTS: Based on 15 articles identified in the literature search, we found that probably benign well-circumscribed masses that were kept under surveillance had a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0-2%. New or enlarging solitary well-circumscribed masses had a PPV of 10-12%. In general the detected carcinomas had a favorable prognosis. In our exploration of screening practice, 25% of recalls (2133/8860) were triggered by a well-circumscribed mass. Those recalls had a PPV of 2.0% for initial and 10.6% for subsequent screening. Most detected carcinomas had a favorable prognosis as well. CONCLUSION: To recognize malignancies presenting as well-circumscribed masses, identifying solitary, new or growing lesions is key. This information is missing at initial screening since prior examinations are not available, leading to a low PPV. Access to prior clinical examinations may therefore improve this PPV. In addition, given the generally favorable prognosis of screen-detected malignant well-circumscribed masses, one may opt to recall these lesions at subsequent screening, if grown, rather than at initial screening

Trends in incidence and detection of advanced breast cancer at biennial screening mammography in The Netherlands: a population based study

INTRODUCTION: The aims of this study were to determine trends in the incidence of advanced breast cancer at screening mammography and the potential of screening to reduce it. METHODS: We included a consecutive series of 351,009 screening mammograms of 85,274 women aged 50-75 years, who underwent biennial screening at a Dutch breast screening region in the period 1997-2008. Two screening radiologists reviewed the screening mammograms of all advanced screen detected and advanced interval cancers and determined whether the advanced cancer (tumor > 20 mm and/or lymph node positive tumor) had been visible at a previous screen. Interval cancers were breast cancers diagnosed in women after a negative screening examination (defined as no recommendation for referral) and before any subsequent screen. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between women with advanced cancer and women with non-advanced cancer, including ductal carcinoma in situ. RESULTS: A total of 1,771 screen detected cancers and 669 interval cancers were diagnosed in 2,440 women. Rates of advanced cancer remained stable over the 12-year period; the incidence of advanced screen-detected cancers fluctuated between 1.5 - 1.9 per 1,000 screened women (mean 1.6 per 1,000) and of advanced interval cancers between 0.8 - 1.6 per 1,000 screened women (mean 1.2 per 1,000). Of the 570 advanced screen-detected cancers, 106 (18.6%) were detected at initial screening; 265 (46.5%) cancers detected at subsequent screening had been radiologically occult at the previous screening mammogram, 88 (15.4%) had shown a minimal sign, and 111 (19.5%) had been missed. Corresponding figures for advanced interval cancers were 50.9% (216/424), 24.3% (103/424) and 25.1% (105/424), respectively. At multivariate analysis, women with a ≥ 30 months interval between the latest two screens had an increased risk of screen-detected advanced breast cancer (OR 1.63, 95%CI: 1.07-2.48) and hormone replacement therapy increased the risk of advanced disease among interval cancers (OR 3.04, 95%CI: 1.22-7.53). CONCLUSION: We observed no decline in the risk of advanced breast cancer during 12 years of biennial screening mammography. The majority of these cancers could not have been prevented through earlier detection at screening