Article Text

Download PDFPDF

2022-RA-670-ESGO Age limits of mammography screening – a decision-analytic evaluation of the benefit-harm balance to inform decision making for the German screening context
Free
  1. Gaby Sroczynski1,
  2. Lára Rún Hallsson1,
  3. Nikolai Mühlberger1,
  4. Felicitas Kühne1,
  5. Beate Jahn1,2,
  6. Heike Kölsch3,
  7. Stefan Sauerland3,
  8. Konstanze Angelescu3 and
  9. Uwe Siebert1,2,4,5,5
  1. 1Institute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT – University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall i. T., Austria
  2. 2Division of Health Technology Assessment, ONCOTYROL Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Innsbruck, Austria
  3. 3Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG), Cologne, Germany
  4. 4Center for Health Decision Science, Departments of Epidemiology and Health Policy and Management, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA
  5. 5Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

Abstract

Introduction/Background We aimed to evaluate the long-term benefits and harms of various breast cancer (BC) screening strategies including mammography with an earlier start and/or later stop than the current biennial BC screening age 50–69 years in Germany using a decision-analytic model for evidence synthesis.

Methodology We developed a Markov-state-transition model simulating BC progression including ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) to evaluate various screening strategies differing by age at start and end of screening and by screening interval. International data for mammography accuracy along with German epidemiologic, clinical data and age-specific quality-of-life (QoL) data were used. Outcomes included detected DCIS and invasive BC, BC-related deaths, life years LY), and quality-adjusted LY (QALY), number of positive, false-positive, and total mammograms, overdiagnosis, and the incremental harm-benefit ratio (IHBR). Comprehensive sensitivity analyses were conducted.

Results In the base-case analysis, the highest potential gain in LY was achieved with mammography at age 45–79 (annual, age 45–49 y; biennial, 50–79 y) with 10.0 LY gained (LYG) per 100 participating women compared with current screening. The highest gain in QALYs is expected by biennial mammography at ages 45–74 (3.5 QALYs gained/100 women vs. current screening). Considering potential burden associated with additional mammograms, lowering the start age to 45 years (biennial, age 45–69 y) has an IHBR of 47 additional mammograms/LYG (vs. current screening). Compared to this screening, biennial mammography at age 45–74 results in 96 additional mammograms/LYG. Extending biennial mammography to age 45–79 or additionally screen annually at age 45–49 results in substantially less favorable IHBRs. Overdiagnoses occurred mainly due to DCIS. Key results were robust in sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion Based on our results, extension of the starting and stopping age for mammography may prevent additional BC deaths and increase remaining life expectancy. Considering QoL, biennial screening from age 45 to 74 years may provide an acceptable benefit-harm balance.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.