Home LiteratureArticle Details
PMID: 11036111 Published · ppublish English Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Predicting the cumulative risk of false-positive mammograms.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute ·Vol. 92 ·No. 20 ·2000-10-18 ·Pages 1657-66

Christiansen CL, Wang F, Barton MB, Kreuter W, Elmore JG, Gelfand AE, Fletcher SW

Abstract

The cumulative risk of a false-positive mammogram can be substantial. We studied which variables affect the chance of a false-positive mammogram and estimated cumulative risks over nine sequential mammograms. We used medical records of 2227 randomly selected women who were 40-69 years of age on July 1, 1983, and had at least one screening mammogram. We used a Bayesian discrete hazard regression model developed for this study to test the effect of patient and radiologic variables on a first false-positive screening and to calculate cumulative risks of a false-positive mammogram. Of 9747 screening mammograms, 6. 5% were false-positive; 23.8% of women experienced at least one false-positive result. After nine mammograms, the risk of a false-positive mammogram was 43.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 36.6%-53.6%). Risk ratios decreased with increasing age and increased with number of breast biopsies, family history of breast cancer, estrogen use, time between screenings, no comparison with previous mammograms, and the radiologist's tendency to call mammograms abnormal. For a woman with highest-risk variables, the estimated risk for a false-positive mammogram at the first and by the ninth mammogram was 98.1% (95% CI = 69.3%-100%) and 100% (95% CI = 99.9%-100%), respectively. A woman with lowest-risk variables had estimated risks of 0.7% (95% CI = 0.2%-1.9%) and 4.6% (95% CI = 1. 1%-12.5%), respectively. The cumulative risk of a false-positive mammogram over time varies substantially, depending on a woman's own risk profile and on several factors related to radiologic screening. By the ninth mammogram, the risk can be as low as 5% for women with low-risk variables and as high as 100% for women with multiple high-risk factors.

MeSH Terms
Adult Aged Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging,prevention & control False Positive Reactions Female Humans Mammography/adverse effects Mass Screening/adverse effects,methods Middle Aged Models, Statistical Odds Ratio Predictive Value of Tests Risk Risk Factors Sampling Studies
Authors & Affiliations
7 authors, click to expand affiliations / ORCID
Christiansen C L
Boston University School of Public Health, Health Services Department, and Center for Health Quality, Outcomes and Economic Research at Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development, Boston, MA 01730, USA. [email protected]
Wang F
Barton M B
Kreuter W
Elmore J G
Gelfand A E
Fletcher S W
Article Info
Journal
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Abbr.
J Natl Cancer Inst
ISSN
0027-8874
Published
2000-10-18
Pages
1657-66
Language
English
Region
United States
NLM ID
7503089
Subset
IM
Analysis Services
Analysis Services

Contact

No. 2 Wenbo Road, Zhangqiu District, Jinan, Shandong

Qilu Normal University · Genelibs Bioinformatics Lab

750 Shunhua Rd, Jinan

2F, Bldg F, University Science Park

Tel: 0531-88819269

WeChat Official Account

Follow our WeChat subscription account for real-time updates and the latest in medical and biological research.


Business Email

E-mail: [email protected]