Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer

46Citations
Citations of this article
107Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objectives: Mammography screening is generally accepted in women aged 50–69, but the balance between benefits and harms remains controversial in other age groups. This study systematically reviews these effects to inform the European Breast Cancer Guidelines. Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of observational studies in the absence of RCTs comparing invitation to mammography screening to no invitation in women at average breast cancer (BC) risk. We extracted data for mortality, BC stage, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy provision, overdiagnosis and false-positive-related adverse effects. We performed a pooled analysis of relative risks, applying an inverse-variance random-effects model for three age groups (<50, 50–69 and 70–74). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. Results: We identified 10 RCTs including 616,641 women aged 38–75. Mammography reduced BC mortality in women aged 50–69 (relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95%CI (confidence interval) 0.66–0.90, high certainty) and 70–74 (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54–1.09, high certainty), with smaller reductions in under 50s (RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.76–1.02, moderate certainty). Mammography reduced stage IIA+ in women 50–69 (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64–1.00, very low certainty) but resulted in an overdiagnosis probability of 23% (95%CI 18–27%) and 17% (95%CI 15–20%) in under 50s and 50–69, respectively (moderate certainty). Mammography was associated with 2.9% increased risk of invasive procedures with benign outcomes (low certainty). Conclusions: For women 50–69, high certainty evidence that mammography screening reduces BC mortality risk would support policymakers formulating strong recommendations. In other age groups, where the net balance of effects is less clear, conditional recommendations will be more likely, together with shared decision-making.

References Powered by Scopus

The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

25991Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

15144Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

GRADE guidelines: A new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

2248Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Benefits and harms of annual, biennial, or triennial breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC)

32Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

A randomised controlled trial of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography as primary screening tests: Screening results over subsequent episodes of the Proteus Donna study

16Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Mammographic features of benign breast lesions and risk of subsequent breast cancer in women attending breast cancer screening

15Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Canelo-Aybar, C., Ferreira, D. S., Ballesteros, M., Posso, M., Montero, N., Solà, I., … Alonso-Coello, P. (2021, December 1). Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer. Journal of Medical Screening. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969141321993866

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 24

71%

Researcher 5

15%

Lecturer / Post doc 4

12%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 19

59%

Nursing and Health Professions 6

19%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 4

13%

Engineering 3

9%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free