Journal of medical screening · 1999
Breast cancers missed in the prevalent screening round: effect upon the size distribution of incident round detected cancers.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maxwell A J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of false negative screens (missed cancers) in the prevalent screening round on the relative size distribution of cancers detected at the first incident screen.
SETTING: The Bolton, Bury, and Rochdale breast screening programme.
METHODS: One hundred and three breast cancers detected in the first incident round of screening were analysed. The previous (prevalent round) screening films taken between two and four years earlier were subjected to blinded review and classified as either true negatives (no significant abnormality visible) or false negatives (a suspicious abnormality visible at the site of the subsequently detected cancer). The pathological size, type, and grade (where appropriate) of the cancers were recorded.
RESULTS: Fifty one of the 103 cancers (49%) detected in the first incident round screen measured < 15 mm in diameter. A total of 32 cases were classified as false negatives. Of these, 12 (38%) measured < 15 mm in diameter. If all the false negative cancers had been detected at the prevalent screen, 39 (55%) of the remaining 71 cancers detected in the first incident round screen would have measured < 15 mm. A relative excess of lobular carcinomas was found among the false negatives.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that although false negative screens in the prevalent round increase the number of cancers available for detection at the first incident round screen, many of these cancers are still < 15 mm in diameter at detection. Cancer detection performance in the prevalent screening round has only a minor influence on the relative proportion of small and large cancers detected at the first incident round screen.
SETTING: The Bolton, Bury, and Rochdale breast screening programme.
METHODS: One hundred and three breast cancers detected in the first incident round of screening were analysed. The previous (prevalent round) screening films taken between two and four years earlier were subjected to blinded review and classified as either true negatives (no significant abnormality visible) or false negatives (a suspicious abnormality visible at the site of the subsequently detected cancer). The pathological size, type, and grade (where appropriate) of the cancers were recorded.
RESULTS: Fifty one of the 103 cancers (49%) detected in the first incident round screen measured < 15 mm in diameter. A total of 32 cases were classified as false negatives. Of these, 12 (38%) measured < 15 mm in diameter. If all the false negative cancers had been detected at the prevalent screen, 39 (55%) of the remaining 71 cancers detected in the first incident round screen would have measured < 15 mm. A relative excess of lobular carcinomas was found among the false negatives.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that although false negative screens in the prevalent round increase the number of cancers available for detection at the first incident round screen, many of these cancers are still < 15 mm in diameter at detection. Cancer detection performance in the prevalent screening round has only a minor influence on the relative proportion of small and large cancers detected at the first incident round screen.