Evaluation issues in the Swedish Two-County Trial of breast cancer screening: An historical review

Objectives To summarize debate and research in the Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening on key issues of trial design, endpoint evaluation, and overdiagnosis, and from these to infer promising directions for the future. Methods A cluster-randomized controlled trial of the offer of breast cancer screening in Sweden, with a single screen of the control group at the end of the screening phase forms the setting for a historical review of investigations and debate on issues of design, analysis, and interpretation of results of the trial. Results There has been considerable commentary on the closure screen of the control group, ascertainment of cause of death, and cluster randomization. The issues raised were researched in detail and the main questions answered in publications between 1989 and 2003. Overdiagnosis issues still remain, but methods of estimation taking full account of lead time and of non-screening influences on incidence (taking place mainly before 2005) suggest that it is a minor phenomenon. Conclusion Despite resolution of issues relating to this trial in peer-reviewed publications dating from years, or even decades ago, issues that already have been addressed continue to be raised. We suggest that it would be more profitable to concentrate efforts on current research issues in breast cancer diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.

[1]  D. Oram,et al.  Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial , 2016, The Lancet.

[2]  P. Boyle,et al.  Statistical analyses in Swedish randomised trials on mammography screening and in other randomised trials on cancer screening: a systematic review , 2015, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[3]  P. Glasziou,et al.  A novel case‐control design to estimate the extent of over‐diagnosis of breast cancer due to organised population‐based mammography screening , 2015, International journal of cancer.

[4]  S. Duffy,et al.  Estimates of over-diagnosis of breast cancer due to population-based mammography screening in South Australia after adjustment for lead time effects , 2015, Journal of medical screening.

[5]  S. Duffy,et al.  A note on the design of cancer screening trials , 2015, Journal of medical screening.

[6]  P. Gøtzsche,et al.  Overestimated lead times in cancer screening has led to substantial underestimation of overdiagnosis , 2013, British Journal of Cancer.

[7]  J. P. Garne,et al.  Over-diagnosis estimate from The Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening is based on unsuitable data , 2013, Journal of medical screening.

[8]  S. Duffy,et al.  Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time , 2013, Breast Cancer Research.

[9]  L. Tabár,et al.  Long‐term incidence of breast cancer by trial arm in one county of the Swedish Two‐County Trial of mammographic screening , 2012, Cancer.

[10]  A. Bleyer,et al.  Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  D. Altman,et al.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review , 2012, British Journal of Cancer.

[12]  E. Paci,et al.  Overdiagnosis in breast cancer: design and methods of estimation in observational studies. , 2011, Preventive medicine.

[13]  L. Tabár,et al.  Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. , 2011, Radiology.

[14]  S. Duffy,et al.  Mammographic screening and "overdiagnosis". , 2011, Radiology.

[15]  S. Moss,et al.  Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland , 2011, British Journal of Cancer.

[16]  L. Tabár,et al.  Effect of Baseline Breast Density on Breast Cancer Incidence, Stage, Mortality, and Screening Parameters: 25-Year Follow-up of a Swedish Mammographic Screening , 2010, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[17]  L. Tabár,et al.  Differences in Endpoints between the Swedish W-E (Two County) Trial of Mammographic Screening and the Swedish Overview: Methodological Consequences , 2009, Journal of medical screening.

[18]  H. Welch,et al.  The natural history of invasive breast cancers detected by screening mammography. , 2008, Archives of internal medicine.

[19]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The natural history of breast cancer. , 2008, Archives of internal medicine.

[20]  S. Duffy,et al.  Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: Overdiagnosis and overtreatment in service screening , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[21]  L. Tabár,et al.  Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: Estimates of overdiagnosis from two trials of mammographic screening for breast cancer , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[22]  Yueh-Hsia Chiu,et al.  Mammographic tumor features can predict long‐term outcomes reliably in women with 1–14‐mm invasive breast carcinoma , 2004, Cancer.

[23]  L. Tabár,et al.  Mammographic tumour features can reliably predict the long-term outcome of women with 1–14 mm invasive breast cancer: suggestions for revision of current therapeutic practice and the TNM classification system , 2004, Breast Cancer Research.

[24]  Jan Mæhlen,et al.  Incidence of breast cancer in Norway and Sweden during introduction of nationwide screening: prospective cohort study , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  A. Miller.  Commentary: a defence of the Health Insurance Plan (HIP) study and the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS). , 2004, International journal of epidemiology.

[26]  P. Gøtzsche.  On the benefits and harms of screening for breast cancer. , 2004, International journal of epidemiology.

[27]  L. Tabár,et al.  The Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening: cluster randomisation and end point evaluation. , 2003, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[28]  L. Tabár,et al.  Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. , 2003, European journal of cancer.

[29]  L. Tabár,et al.  All-cause mortality among breast cancer patients in a screening trial: support for breast cancer mortality as an end point , 2002, Journal of medical screening.

[30]  D. Haggstrom,et al.  All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening. , 2002, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[31]  A. Miller.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography , 2001, The Lancet.

[32]  L. Tabár,et al.  Estimation of Sojourn Time in Chronic Disease Screening Without Data on Interval Cases , 2000, Biometrics.

[33]  Stephen W Duffy,et al.  A novel method for prediction of long-term outcome of women with T1a, T1b, and 10–14 mm invasive breast cancers: a prospective study , 2000, The Lancet.

[34]  Peter C Gøtzsche,et al.  Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? , 2000, The Lancet.

[35]  L. Tabár,et al.  The natural history of breast carcinoma , 1999, Cancer.

[36]  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.

[37]  Stephen W. Duffy,et al.  A mover-stayer mixture of Markov chain models for the assessment of dedifferentiation and tumour progression in breast cancer , 1997 .

[38]  Ingvar Andersson,et al.  The Swedish Randomised Mammography Screening Trials: Analysis of Their Effect on the Breast Cancer Related Excess Mortality , 1996, Journal of medical screening.

[39]  L. Tabár,et al.  Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. , 1992, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[40]  A. Miller,et al.  Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and its Sequelae, 1963–1986 , 1989 .

[41]  L. Tabár,et al.  The Swedish two county trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer: recent results and calculation of benefit. , 1989, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[42]  P. Skrabanek.  The debate over mass mammography in Britain. The case against. , 1988, BMJ.

[43]  L. Tabár,et al.  What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. , 1987, British Journal of Cancer.

[44]  L. Tabár,et al.  REDUCTION IN MORTALITY FROM BREAST CANCER AFTER MASS SCREENING WITH MAMMOGRAPHY Randomised Trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare , 1985, The Lancet.

[45]  L. Tabár,et al.  Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast: The Use of Radiological Appearance to Classify Tumor Subtypes for Better Prediction of Long- Term Outcome , 2014 .

[46]  Per-Henrik Zahl DrMedSci,et al.  Lead-Time Models Should Not Be Used to Estimate Overdiagnosis in Cancer Screening , 2014, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[47]  L. Tabár,et al.  Some random-effects models for the analysis of matched-cluster randomised trials: application to the Swedish two-county trial of breast-cancer screening. , 2000, Journal of epidemiology and biostatistics.

[48]  G. Fagerberg,et al.  Determination of cause of death among breast cancer cases in the Swedish randomized mammography screening trials. A comparison between official statistics and validation by an endpoint committee. , 1995, Acta oncologica.