Is mammography screening history a predictor of future breast cancer risk?

Sune Bangsbøll Andersen, Sven Törnberg, Sini Kilpeläinen, My Von Euler-Chelpin, Sisse Helle Njor

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Inspired by the model by Walter and Day for risk of cervical cancer following negative screens, one might hypothesize that women in a mammography screening programme with a certain number of negative screens had a lower remaining breast cancer risk than that of women in general. We studied whether number of negative screens was a predictor for a low remaining breast cancer risk in women participating in the mammography screening programmes in Stockholm, Copenhagen and Funen. Data were collected from the mammography screening programmes in Stockholm, Sweden (1989-2012), Copenhagen, Denmark (1991-2009) and Funen, Denmark (1993-2009), and linked to the respective cancer registries. We calculated cumulative hazard rates for breast cancer in women in cohorts defined by age at entry and number of negative screens for the maximum follow-up period in each screening centre. For all centres and cohorts, the cumulative hazard were parallel for all number of negative screens, from after the time, when the women were scheduled to be invited for the next screen. This means that the remaining breast cancer risk is similar no matter how many negative screens a woman have had. Number of negative screens was not a predictor of a low remaining breast cancer risk in women participating in the mammography screening programmes in Stockholm, Sweden, Copenhagen and Funen, Denmark. The history of previous negative screens is therefore not suitable for personalisation of mammography screening.

Original languageEnglish
JournalEuropean Journal of Epidemiology
Volume30
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)143-149
Number of pages7
ISSN0393-2990
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 Mar 2015

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Is mammography screening history a predictor of future breast cancer risk?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this