Basic Principles of Epidemiology and Biostatistics

2014 ◽  
pp. 1005-1012
Author(s):  
Julie E. Buring ◽  
I-Min Lee
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Screening Test ◽  
Basic Principles ◽  
Screening Unit

One hundred women over the age of 50 received mammograms at a mobile breast cancer screening unit. Twenty-seven women had findings suspicious for malignancy on the mammogram; 19 of these women were confirmed as having breast cancer by biopsy. One woman had a negative mammogram but in the subsequent year developed breast cancer and is assumed to have had the disease at the time of screening. What is the sensitivity of the mammogram? The specificity? And the predictive value of a positive screening test?

scholarly journals Feasibility Study of a Randomised Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening among the General Population

1994 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 209-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
C A Parkes ◽  
D Smith ◽  
N J Wald ◽  
T H Bourne
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Screening Test ◽  
False Positive Rate ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Doppler Imaging ◽  
Colour Doppler ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Screening

To determine the feasibility of a randomised trial of ovarian cancer screening among women attending a breast cancer screening centre. Randomised controlled trial of ovarian cancer screening using transvaginal ultrasonography as a primary screening test and colour Doppler imaging as a secondary screening test in the screened group and no intervention in the control group. Reading breast cancer screening centre (United Kingdom). 8678 women, without a bilateral oophorectomy or hysterectomy, aged between SO and 64 attending for NHS breast cancer screening between September 1989 and February 1993. Uptake of ovarian cancer screening among eligible women and the screening false positive rate (considered as the referral rate to a gynaecologist for surgical intervention). −82% (7124/8678) of eligible women agreed to join the trial and were randomly allocated in equal numbers to each arm of the trial. 3280 women had an initial scan. The false positive rate after ultrasonography alone was 2·9% (86/2952), but this dropped to 0·5% after colour Doppler as a secondary screening test. One stage I primary ovarian cancer was detected at screening in a 58 year old women. A randomised trial of ovarian cancer screening using ultrasonography and colour Doppler imaging is feasible and acceptable among women attending a breast cancer screening centre. The results indicate that the expected odds of being affected given a positive result in the general population would be about 1:12. A full randomised trial of ovarian cancer screening with mortality as the end point is needed to assess whether screening reduces mortality from this disease. A multicentre European trial is currently in progress.

Predictive value of short-term follow-up in a breast cancer screening program

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. e140-e141
Author(s):  
B. Szynglarewicz ◽  
P. Kasprzak ◽  
E. Kowalska ◽  
D. Blaszczyk ◽  
A. Maciejczyk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening Program ◽  
Cancer Screening Program

Estimating mean sojourn time and screening test sensitivity in breast cancer mammography screening: new results

2005 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 172-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Weedon-Fekjær ◽  
Lars J Vatten ◽  
Odd O Aalen ◽  
Bo Lindqvist ◽  
Steinar Tretli
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Hormone Replacement Therapy ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Breast Cancer Screening ◽  
Sojourn Time ◽  
Screening Test ◽  
Hormone Replacement ◽  
Opportunistic Screening ◽  
Test Sensitivity

Objective: To assess if new screening techniques, increased use of hormone replacement therapy, or the transition from breast cancer screening trials to large scale screening programmes may influence the average time in preclinical screening detectable phase (mean sojourn time [MST]) or screening test sensitivity (STS). Setting: Screening and interval data for 395,188 women participating in the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Programme (NBCSP). Methods: Weighted non-linear least-square regression estimates using a tree step Markov chain model, and a sensitivity analysis of the possible impact by opportunistic screening between ordinary breast cancer screening rounds. Results: MST was estimated to 6.1 (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.1–7.0) years for women aged 50–59 years, and 7.9 (95% CI 6.0–7.9) years for those aged 60–69 years. Correspondingly, STS was estimated to 58% (95% CI 52–64 %) and 73 % (67–78 %), respectively. Simulations revealed that opportunistic screening may give a moderate estimation bias towards higher MST and lower STS. Assuming a probable 21% higher background incidence, due to increased hormone replacement therapy use, MST estimates decreased to 3.9 and 5.0 years for the two age groups, and STS increased to 75 and 85%. Conclusions: The new estimates indicate that screening detectable phase is longer than that found in previous mammography trials/programmes, but also that the sensitivity of the screening test is lower. Overall, the NBCSP detects more cancer cases than most previous trials/programmes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document