Determination of cause of death among breast cancer cases in the swedish randomized mammography screening trials: A comparison between official statistics and validation by an endpoint committee

97Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Between 1976 and 1982, four randomized mammography screening trials started in five screening centres in Sweden, involving 282 777 women (156 911 invited and 125 866 controls) with the aim to study if invitation to screening reduced the breast cancer mortality. An overview of the trials was performed to reduce the confidence intervals for the relative risk estimates. All 1 296 deaths occurring in women with breast cancer detected after randomization were evaluated by an independent endpoint committee (EPC), consisting of four physicians who reviewed collected medical information that was blinded regarding mammography screening. If there was disagreement between the EPC members at the initial individual evaluation the final classification was made at concensus meetings. In only 6.9% (n = 89) of the cases was there disagreement as to whether breast cancer was or was not the underlying cause of death. It was also found that breast cancer as underlying cause of death' and breast cancer as underlying or contributory cause of death' according to Statistics Sweden resulted in relative risk estimates very similar to those based on the classification by the EPC. The study thus supports the use of official health statistics in the evaluation of randomized breast screening trials in Sweden. ©1995 Informa UK Ltd All rights reserved: reproduction in whole or part not permitted.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nyström, L., Larsson, L. G., Rutqvist, L. E., Lindgren, A., Lindqvist, M., Rydén, S., … Tabár, L. (1995). Determination of cause of death among breast cancer cases in the swedish randomized mammography screening trials: A comparison between official statistics and validation by an endpoint committee. Acta Oncologica, 34(2), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.3109/02841869509093948

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free