User login
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed more than three million screening mammograms from more than one million women aged between 40 and 73 years at nearly 200 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium between 2005 and 2017.
- Mammography results were classified as true negative or false positive; women who received false-positive results were either asked to come back for additional imaging, a short interval follow-up or biopsy recommendations.
- The primary outcome was the probability of returning for routine screening within 9-30 months after a false-positive or true-negative result, adjusted for race, ethnicity, age, and time since the last mammogram.
- Women with two screening mammograms within 5 years were also analyzed to evaluate the probability of returning for a third screening based on combinations of true-negative and false-positive results.
TAKEAWAY:
- Nearly 10.0% (95% CI, 9.1%-10.5%) of women who received screening mammograms got a false-positive result, 5.8% (95% CI, 5.5%-6.2%) of whom needed immediate additional imaging, 2.7% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.2%) needed short-interval follow-up, and 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1%-1.4%) were recommended for a biopsy.
- Women were more likely to return for screening after a true-negative result (76.9%) than after a false positive to obtain more data through additional imaging (72.4%), short-interval follow-ups (54.7%), or biopsy (61.0%).
- Asian and Hispanic/Latinx women who received a false-positive result were much less likely to return for a screening than women of the same groups who received a true-negative result, with recommendations for short interval follow-up (decrease of 20-25 percentage points) or biopsy (decrease of 13-14 percentage points).
- For women who had two screening mammograms within 5 years, receiving a false-positive result on the second was linked to a lower likelihood of returning for a third screening, regardless of results for the first.
IN PRACTICE:
“Physicians should educate their patients about the importance of continued screening after false-positive results, especially given the associated increased future risk for breast cancer,” study authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Diana L. Miglioretti, PhD, of the Department of Public Health Sciences at the University of California, Davis, and published online on September 3 in Annals of Internal Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
Women could receive care at facilities outside of the trial, which may have affected the accuracy of return rates. The study did not track a complete history of false-positive results. The study did not have information about how often physicians recommend screenings and did not account for other health conditions.
DISCLOSURES:
One coauthor reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and the American Cancer Society, as well as consulting fees from the University of Florida, Gainesville.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed more than three million screening mammograms from more than one million women aged between 40 and 73 years at nearly 200 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium between 2005 and 2017.
- Mammography results were classified as true negative or false positive; women who received false-positive results were either asked to come back for additional imaging, a short interval follow-up or biopsy recommendations.
- The primary outcome was the probability of returning for routine screening within 9-30 months after a false-positive or true-negative result, adjusted for race, ethnicity, age, and time since the last mammogram.
- Women with two screening mammograms within 5 years were also analyzed to evaluate the probability of returning for a third screening based on combinations of true-negative and false-positive results.
TAKEAWAY:
- Nearly 10.0% (95% CI, 9.1%-10.5%) of women who received screening mammograms got a false-positive result, 5.8% (95% CI, 5.5%-6.2%) of whom needed immediate additional imaging, 2.7% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.2%) needed short-interval follow-up, and 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1%-1.4%) were recommended for a biopsy.
- Women were more likely to return for screening after a true-negative result (76.9%) than after a false positive to obtain more data through additional imaging (72.4%), short-interval follow-ups (54.7%), or biopsy (61.0%).
- Asian and Hispanic/Latinx women who received a false-positive result were much less likely to return for a screening than women of the same groups who received a true-negative result, with recommendations for short interval follow-up (decrease of 20-25 percentage points) or biopsy (decrease of 13-14 percentage points).
- For women who had two screening mammograms within 5 years, receiving a false-positive result on the second was linked to a lower likelihood of returning for a third screening, regardless of results for the first.
IN PRACTICE:
“Physicians should educate their patients about the importance of continued screening after false-positive results, especially given the associated increased future risk for breast cancer,” study authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Diana L. Miglioretti, PhD, of the Department of Public Health Sciences at the University of California, Davis, and published online on September 3 in Annals of Internal Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
Women could receive care at facilities outside of the trial, which may have affected the accuracy of return rates. The study did not track a complete history of false-positive results. The study did not have information about how often physicians recommend screenings and did not account for other health conditions.
DISCLOSURES:
One coauthor reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and the American Cancer Society, as well as consulting fees from the University of Florida, Gainesville.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers analyzed more than three million screening mammograms from more than one million women aged between 40 and 73 years at nearly 200 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium between 2005 and 2017.
- Mammography results were classified as true negative or false positive; women who received false-positive results were either asked to come back for additional imaging, a short interval follow-up or biopsy recommendations.
- The primary outcome was the probability of returning for routine screening within 9-30 months after a false-positive or true-negative result, adjusted for race, ethnicity, age, and time since the last mammogram.
- Women with two screening mammograms within 5 years were also analyzed to evaluate the probability of returning for a third screening based on combinations of true-negative and false-positive results.
TAKEAWAY:
- Nearly 10.0% (95% CI, 9.1%-10.5%) of women who received screening mammograms got a false-positive result, 5.8% (95% CI, 5.5%-6.2%) of whom needed immediate additional imaging, 2.7% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.2%) needed short-interval follow-up, and 1.3% (95% CI, 1.1%-1.4%) were recommended for a biopsy.
- Women were more likely to return for screening after a true-negative result (76.9%) than after a false positive to obtain more data through additional imaging (72.4%), short-interval follow-ups (54.7%), or biopsy (61.0%).
- Asian and Hispanic/Latinx women who received a false-positive result were much less likely to return for a screening than women of the same groups who received a true-negative result, with recommendations for short interval follow-up (decrease of 20-25 percentage points) or biopsy (decrease of 13-14 percentage points).
- For women who had two screening mammograms within 5 years, receiving a false-positive result on the second was linked to a lower likelihood of returning for a third screening, regardless of results for the first.
IN PRACTICE:
“Physicians should educate their patients about the importance of continued screening after false-positive results, especially given the associated increased future risk for breast cancer,” study authors wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Diana L. Miglioretti, PhD, of the Department of Public Health Sciences at the University of California, Davis, and published online on September 3 in Annals of Internal Medicine.
LIMITATIONS:
Women could receive care at facilities outside of the trial, which may have affected the accuracy of return rates. The study did not track a complete history of false-positive results. The study did not have information about how often physicians recommend screenings and did not account for other health conditions.
DISCLOSURES:
One coauthor reported receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health and the American Cancer Society, as well as consulting fees from the University of Florida, Gainesville.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.