Context Seven- and 10-year results of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS) showed no reduction in breast cancer mortality from five annual mammographies and breast examinations for 40- to 49-year-old women. Some authors have argued that longer follow-up would reveal important benefits. Contribution After 11 to 16 years, the cumulative rate ratios for mammography versus usual care were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.74 to 1.27) for breast cancer mortality without adjustment for nonstudy mammography and 1.06 (CI, 0.80 to 1.40) with adjustment. Clinical Implications The CNBSS suggests that screening 40- to 49-year-old women is unlikely to reduce breast cancer by 20% or more. Controversy will persist because other studies suggest that screening causes small reductions in breast cancer mortality. The Editors The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1 (CNBSS-1), an individually randomized trial in women 40 to 49 years of age at study entry, evaluated the efficacy of annual mammography, breast physical examination, and instruction on breast self-examination in reducing breast cancer mortality (1). The 7-year (2) and preliminary 10-year (3) mortality results were previously reported. At 7 years, 38 women in the mammography group and 28 women in the usual care group had died of breast cancer, for a rate ratio of 1.36 (95% CI, 0.84 to 2.21) (2). At 10 years, there were 82 breast cancer deaths in the mammography group and 72 in the usual care group (rate ratio, 1.14 [CI, 0.83 to 1.56]) (3). This article reports CNBSS-1 results after an average 13-year follow-up from study entry. Methods Patient Selection and Recruitment Participants were recruited through media publicity, personal invitation letters using population lists (municipal registers and provincial health insurance registers), group mailings, and physicians (4). Eligibility criteria were age 40 to 49 years, no previous diagnosis of breast cancer, not being pregnant, no mammography in the previous 12 months, and signed informed consent. The Human Experimentation Committee of the University of Toronto (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) and Human Experimentation Committees at 15 CNBSS collaborating centers approved the study. A total of 50 430 women age 40 to 49 years were enrolled from January 1980 through March 1985. Randomization Before randomization, all participants received an initial breast physical examination and instruction on breast self-examination. They were then immediately randomly assigned to receive mammography and, thereafter, either annual screening with mammography and breast physical examination (25 214 women in the mammography group were available for analysis) or usual care in the context of the Canadian health care system (25 216 women in the usual care group were available for analysis). Center coordinators randomly assigned participants using prepared allocation lists, independent of breast physical examination findings. This sequence ensured that the conduct and interpretation of the breast physical examination would be unbiased by knowledge of whether mammography would follow. Intervention Screening Schedule In the mammography group, 62% of women received five annual screenings. The remainder, recruited later, received four. Each screening examination comprised mammography, breast physical examination, and instruction and evaluation on breast self-examination. Women in the mammography group completed questionnaires at each rescreening visit. Women in the usual care group were not recalled for rescreening but were mailed annual questionnaires. We expected that these participants would continue their normal pattern of medical care as delivered through Canada's universal health care coverage, including access to mammography for diagnosis. Study Procedures Two-view mammography was done on dedicated mammography units (5), and second readers reviewed mammograms deemed abnormal. Systematic audit procedures were used (6). Nurses provided breast physical examination in 12 centers and physicians in 3 centers in Qubec (7). These providers taught and evaluated breast self-examination while conducting their own examination (8). If findings on breast physical examination or mammography were abnormal, participants were referred to a CNBSS review clinic. The study surgeon discussed mammography findings with the study radiologist, examined the participant, and decided whether further diagnostic procedures should be recommended to the woman's physician. The woman's physician determined whether and how to implement the study surgeon's recommendations. Data Collection Protocol During the screening period, the center coordinators collected surgery and pathology reports for breast-related diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The CNBSS pathologists reviewed all slides. If the community and CNBSS pathologist disagreed, a panel of three to five CNBSS pathologists blindedly and independently reviewed the slides. Extensive quality control procedures were used during data collection. After the screening centers closed in 1988, the central CNBSS central office annually followed all women known to have breast cancer until 30 June 1996, the cut-off for this analysis. Passive follow-up of all participants through linkage with the National Cancer Registry identified new diagnoses of breast cancer in study participants through 31 December 1993. The central office collected pathology reports for postscreening cases of breast cancer. The community diagnosis was accepted for study purposes. Family members responding to the annual mailed questionnaire identified deaths that occurred before completion of a participant's screening schedule. Thereafter, women not known to have cancer were followed only through registry linkage; their mammography experience was not traced. However, for women known to have breast cancer, attending physicians received annual requests for updated clinical information, including death. Attending physicians, who received annual requests for information on women with breast cancer, reported deaths until 30 June 1996. Linkage with the Canadian Mortality Database at Statistics Canada (including deaths in Canadians who resided in the United States at the time of death) identified causes of death in the entire cohort until 31 December 1993. The procedures used to verify deaths from breast cancer were described previously (2). Investigative procedures were initiated for women dying with breast cancer; those whose death certificates mentioned breast cancer; and those whose cause of death was described as unknown, unknown primary, lung cancer, colon cancer, or liver cancer. The reviewers were blinded to study group allocation. All other causes of death were accepted as certified. For the most recent record linkage, more stringent confidentiality requirements exercised by many hospitals hindered verification. Thus, of the breast cancer deaths reported in this paper, a panel reviewed 67% in the mammography group and 77% in the usual care group. The remaining deaths are as reported on death certificates. Study Outcomes Death due to or probably due to breast cancer was the major study outcome. A previous report of the CNBBS-1 noted axillary node status, as assessed by community pathologists, through 7 years of follow-up (2). Subsequently (1993 to 1997), to achieve consistent reporting of tumor size, all available material for screening-detected cancer and cancer detected between screenings was re-collected from originating institutions and reviewed by one of the CNBSS pathologists or a colleague. Slides were obtained for review for nearly 80% of requested cases. For the current analysis, pathologists measured the size of small tumors as observed on the slide or the size of the invasive component for mixed invasive and in situ tumors. Statistical Analysis Sample Size The CNBSS-1 was planned to evaluate whether breast cancer mortality would decrease by 40% in the mammography group compared with the usual care group after 5 years of follow-up, with a required sample size of 50 000 women ( = 0.05; power, 80%) (1). At 5 years, however, too few women had died of breast cancer for the study to achieve the planned power. Thus, for the first report on breast cancer mortality, we extended follow-up to 7 years (2). CNBSS Database The database includes records for 50 430 women, including demographic and risk factor variables and results of screening examinations, diagnostic and therapeutic procedures, pathology results, and causes of death. CNBSS Terminology The terms screen 1, screen 2, through screen 5 denote events associated with screening examinations in the mammography group. The initial breast physical examination received by the usual care group is called screen 1. Screening-detected cancers are those diagnosed after a recommendation made by the study surgeon at the CNBSS review clinic. Interval cancers are cases of cancer that occurred less than 12 months after a screening examination at which no recommendation for diagnostic procedures was made. Incident cancers are cases of cancer that occurred more than 12 months after the previous CNBSS screening examination. Statistical Tests The statistical significance of differences in proportions was determined by using the chi-square test (two-sided = 0.05). For all observed-to-expected ratios, 95% CIs were computed. Death rates were computed by using person-years based on stratification by quinquennium of age; we assumed that all women not known to be dead are alive. Age was defined as age at entry. Because all eligible participants were included in the analysis and follow-up, this is an intention-to-treat analysis. Cox proportional-hazards regression was done to examine variables with the most significant independent influence on survival (9), using the PHREG program in SAS software, version 6.12 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina). Because the variable allocation to screening was our primary interest, it was fo
[1]
R. Demicheli,et al.
Premenopausal Status Accelerates Relapse in Node Positive Breast Cancer: Hypothesis Links Angiogenesis, Screening Controversy
,
2001,
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.
[2]
C J Baines,et al.
Effect of breast self-examination techniques on the risk of death from breast cancer.
,
1997,
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.
[3]
C. Baines.
Impediments to recruitment in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: response and resolution.
,
1984,
Controlled clinical trials.
[4]
D. Bartlett,et al.
Preventive Health Care
,
2020,
The SAGE Encyclopedia of Trans Studies.
[5]
Screening mammography re-evaluated
,
2000,
The Lancet.
[6]
P. Prorok,et al.
Concepts and problems in the evaluation of screening programs.
,
1981,
Journal of chronic diseases.
[7]
K. Kerlikowske,et al.
Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
,
1996,
JAMA.
[8]
N. Baxter.
Preventive health care, 2001 update: should women be routinely taught breast self-examination to screen for breast cancer?
,
2001,
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.
[9]
C J Baines,et al.
Audit procedures in the National Breast Screening Study: mammography interpretation.
,
1986,
Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes.
[10]
Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.
Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography
,
2001,
The Lancet.
[11]
S. Shapiro,et al.
Periodic breast cancer screening in reducing mortality from breast cancer.
,
1971,
JAMA.
[12]
A. Miller,et al.
Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in 15 NBSS centres.
,
1988,
Canadian Association of Radiologists journal = Journal l'Association canadienne des radiologistes.
[13]
A. Miller,et al.
Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian national breast screening study
,
1990,
Cancer.
[14]
Richard Horton,et al.
Screening mammography—an overview revisited
,
2001,
The Lancet.
[15]
C. Baines.
The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: A Perspective on Criticisms
,
1994,
Annals of Internal Medicine.
[16]
M. Moskowitz,et al.
On the diagnosis of minimal breast cancer in a screenee population
,
1976,
Cancer.
[17]
D. Berry,et al.
Benefits and risks of screening mammography for women in their forties: a statistical appraisal.
,
1998,
Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
[18]
A. Miller,et al.
The National Study of Breast Cancer Screening Protocol for a Canadian Randomized Controlled trial of screening for breast cancer in women.
,
1981,
Clinical and investigative medicine. Medecine clinique et experimentale.
[19]
I. Olivotto,et al.
Performance of screening mammography in organized programs in Canada in 1996. The Database Management Subcommittee to the National Committee for the Canadian Breast Cancer Screening Initiative.
,
2000,
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.
[20]
R. Hendrick,et al.
Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40-49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
,
1997,
Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.
[21]
L. Tabár,et al.
Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer.
,
1992,
Radiologic clinics of North America.
[22]
C J Baines,et al.
The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: update on breast cancer mortality.
,
1997,
Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs.
[23]
A. Miller,et al.
Intermediate histological effect markers for breast cancer.
,
2001,
IARC scientific publications.
[24]
A. Miller,et al.
Canadian National Breast Screening Study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50-59 years.
,
2000,
Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
[25]
A. Miller,et al.
Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years.
,
1992,
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.
[26]
L. Tabár,et al.
Screening for Breast Cancer in Women Aged under 50: Mode of Detection, Incidence, Fatality, and Histology
,
1995,
Journal of medical screening.
[27]
A. Miller,et al.
The role of the nurse-examiner in the National Breast Screening Study.
,
1991,
Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique.
[28]
Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.
Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?
,
2000,
The Lancet.
[29]
R. Tate,et al.
Using an alternative data source to examine randomization in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study.
,
1996,
Journal of clinical epidemiology.
[30]
P. Prorok,et al.
Issues in the mortality analysis of randomized controlled trials of cancer screening.
,
1994,
Controlled clinical trials.
[31]
S. Narod.
On being the right size: a reappraisal of mammography trials in Canada and Sweden
,
1997,
The Lancet.
[32]
R. Tarone.
The excess of patients with advanced breast cancer in young women screened with mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study
,
1995,
Cancer.
[33]
B. Macmahon,et al.
Randomization in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a review for evidence of subversion.
,
1997,
CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.
[34]
S. Duffy,et al.
Interpretation of the breast screening trials: a commentary on the recent paper by Gøtzsche and Olsen.
,
2001,
Breast.
[35]
S Shapiro,et al.
Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer.
,
1993,
Journal of the National Cancer Institute.