Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen

doi:10.1016/S0960-9776(96)90001-6

The Breast

Volume 5, Issue 5, October 1996, Pages 339-343

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-9776(96)90001-6 Get rights and content

Abstract

Radiologists, blinded to the final diagnosis, reviewed mammograms which had been reported as normal at the prevalent screen, in a group of 133 patients with cancer detected 3 years later at the first incident screen. The aim of this study was to assess whether the mammograms at the prevalent screen demonstrated the cancers picked up at the incident screen, using a similar method to that described by the Northern Regional Audit Group for classification of interval cancers. Of the total number of cancers detected at the incident round there were 30 (22.6%) which could be classified as false negative or missed at the prevalent round. Of these, 25 (83.3%) had been either diagnosed as benign or not noticed on screening, the remainder (5) had been misdiagnosed on assessment. The most common histological type was invasive ductal; 22 (88%) were either Grade 1 or 2. Of the 27 false negative cancers with documented histological lymph node assessment 25% had associated axillary node metastases. By combining the above false negative rate for incident cancers with a similarly calculated one for interval cancers, it was possible to calculate the prevalent round sensitivity for cancer detection at 79.0% for single reading and 85.5% for double reading.

References (14)

W. Simpson et al.
The identification of false negatives in a population of interval cancers: a method for audit of screening mammography
The Breast
(1995)
L. McLean et al.
The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening
Clinical Radiology
(1995)
I. Anttinen et al.
Double reading of mammography screening films — one radiologist or two?
Clinical Radiology
(1993)
E. Anderson et al.
The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening
Clin Radiol
(1994)
A. Forrest
Breast cancer screening: report to the Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland
(1986)
NHSBSE
Quality assurance guidelines for radiologists
(June 1990)
Sykes K and the Breast Screening National Resource Team. Organising assessment of the NHS breast screening programme....

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (24)

Diagnostic accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy in bone and soft tissue tumor: A comparative study of the image-guided and blindly performed procedure
2022, Annals of Diagnostic Pathology
Citation Excerpt :
Few studies examined the prognostic correlation of false negative result in cancer screening [42-44]. Jones et al. reported no difference in prognosis associated with false-negative diagnosis in breast cancer screening [42,44]. However, the study was small, and the blinded retrospective nature of the study was unlikely to reflect actual screening practice.
Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) and core needle biopsy (CNB) can provide tissue samples for the diagnoses of bone and soft tissue tumors. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of FNAC and CNB, the usefulness of the image-guided needle procedures, and assessed whether a discordance can influence the prognosis.
We retrospectively examined the accuracy rates of FNAC and CNB procedures by analyzing results of 405 specimens of 389 patients. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of FNAC and CNB, compared the clinical effectiveness between the image-guided procedures and the blind procedures, and also compared survival rates between the true positive and the false negative cases for patients with high-grade malignant tumors.
The accuracy rates of FNAC were 86.6% and 93.8% for CNB. In cases with non-palpable masses, there were significantly low sampling error rates in the image-guided procedure. There were no significant differences in progression-free-survival and overall survival rates in patients between the false negative and true positive cases.
Both FNAC and CNB procedures had high accuracy rates. Limited to cases with no palpable masses, the image-guided procedure had a low sampling error rate and was an effective method for obtaining tissue samples.
How does computer-aided detection influence screening outcomes? Are all radiologists aided equally?
2005, Breast Diseases
Use of previous screening mammograms to identify features indicating cases that would have a possible gain in prognosis following earlier detection
2003, European Journal of Cancer
Citation Excerpt :
Learning about the characteristics of these cases can help to improve radiologists’ performance and, thereby, overall performance of the screening programme [13,14]. In addition, rereading exercises should be extended to include screen-detected cancers, since detection at screening does not necessarily imply that these cancers could not have been detected earlier [5,15–22]. Estimates of the percentage of screen-detected cancers where a lesion was visible on the previous screening mammogram have ranged from as low as 5% [17] to as high as 67% [22].
False-negative screening mammograms generally refer to breast cancers that were overlooked or misinterpreted at screening. An important question is whether earlier detection could have made a difference in the prognosis of the women concerned. We reviewed screening and diagnostic mammograms of 234 screen-detected and interval cancer cases (aged 44–84 years) diagnosed between 1991 and 1996 in the Nijmegen breast cancer screening programme. A lesion was visible on 117 (50%) of the screening mammograms prior to the diagnosis of breast cancer. Fifty-one out of the 117 cancers had poor prognostic characteristics at diagnosis (i.e. N+ and/or T2+) and could potentially have benefited from an earlier diagnosis (‘possible gain’). The ‘possible gain’ cases were more often characterised by architectural distortion (29 vs. 10%; P=0.01) or a high-density mass (25 vs. 13%; P=0.06) on the mammogram prior to diagnosis than the 58 ‘no gain’ cases. Our study shows that architectural distortion and non-spiculated high-density masses on the mammogram prior to diagnosis are associated with a possible gain in prognosis. Earlier detection of the carcinomas preceded by these signs may well have an impact on breast cancer mortality and thus warrant extra attention in radiological practice.
Radiology review of the UKCCCR breast screening frequency trial: Potential improvements in sensitivity and lead time of radiological signs
2003, Clinical Radiology
AIM: To review all previous mammograms of breast cancer cases diagnosed during a randomized trial comparing 3 yearly to annual mammographic screening with a view to identifying and quantifying cases that might potentially have been diagnosed earlier. METHODS: Mammograms of 602 breast cancer cases (399 screen-detected and 203 interval cases) were reviewed in chronological order and suspicious radiological features noted for each mammogram, up to and including the diagnostic mammogram. RESULTS: Of the 602 cases, 79 (13%) had features at diagnosis that were visible on previous mammograms, suggesting a sensitivity of interpretation of 87%. A similar proportion of screen-detected (14%) and interval cancers (11%) had signs at diagnosis that were visible on previous mammograms. The potential for improvement was particularly noted for asymmetric density (sensitivity = 77%, average time visible before diagnosis 14 months) and parenchymal deformity/stellate lesion (sensitivity = 81%, average time visible before diagnosis 12 months). CONCLUSION: The highest sensitivity was observed for comedo-type microcalcifications (sensitivity = 97%, average time visible before diagnosis 5 months). By improvements in sensitivity to asymmetric density and parenchymal deformity/stellate lesion, 4% of tumours could have their time of diagnosis advanced substantially. Warren R. M. L. etal. (2003) Clinical Radiology58, 128--132.
Current practice regarding reading previous films in the NHS Breast Screening Programme
2002, Radiography
Purpose: To evaluate current practice regarding reading previous films in the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) and review the imaging literature.
Method: All NHSBSP units were sent a postal questionnaire. Each was asked whether they always read with previous films on the viewer? Those that answered, ‘yes’ were asked which films they display medio-lateral oblique (MLO), cranio-caudal (CC), or both?
Results: Ninety-five of 101 centres replied to our postal questionnaire. Ninety-three of the 95 that replied are currently reading previous mammograms as part of their routine practice. Two units said previous mammograms are viewed only selectively. Forty-seven of the 93 that read with previous films display MLO views only. Forty-six of the 93 read both MLO and CC views if these are available.
Conclusion: Consistent with ‘best practice’, most breast screening units in the NHSBSP display previous films when reading screening mammograms.
The sensitivity of the assessment process in screening mammography
2002, Breast
A follow-up of 3143 women from four screening centres, who were assessed after screening mammography, showed that 371 had breast cancer diagnosed at that assessment and 62 developed a breast cancer in the following 6 years. Of these, 32 were judged to be false-negatives at assessment, with 23 of the 32 at the site originally suspected. The results show that the assessment process is not infallible and that the scale of the problem only becomes clear when an exhaustive search is made for missed cancers.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Original articleProportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen

Abstract

The Breast

Clinical Radiology

Clinical Radiology

Clin Radiol

Breast cancer screening: report to the Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

Quality assurance guidelines for radiologists

Original article
Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen