You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Neglected Aspects Of False Positive Findings Of Mammography In Breast Cancer Screening: Analysis Of False Positive Cases From The Stockholm Trial
E. Lidbrink, J. Elfving, J. Frisell and E. Jonsson
BMJ: British Medical Journal
Vol. 312, No. 7026 (Feb. 3, 1996), pp. 273-276
Published by: BMJ
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/29730515
Page Count: 4
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Cancer screening, Mammography, Breast cancer, False positive errors, Lesions, Mortality, Biopsies, Cost efficiency, Carcinoma in situ, Age groups
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Objectives—To examine the implications of false positive results of mammography in terms of the time lag from screening and complete mammography to the point when women with false positive results are declared free of cancer; the extra examinations, biopsies, and check ups required; and the cost of these extra procedures. Design—Review of women with false positive results from the Stockholm mammography screening trial. Setting—Department of Oncology, South Hospital, Stockholm. Subjects—352 and 150 women with false positive results of mammography from the first and second screening rounds of the Stockholm trial. Main outcome measures—Extra examinations and investigations required and the cost of these procedures. Results—The 352 women from the first screening round made 1112 visits to the physician and had 397 fine needle aspiration biopsies, 187 mammograms, and 90 surgical biopsies before being declared free of cancer. After six months 64% of the women (219/342) were declared cancer free. The 150 women in the second round made 427 visits to the physician and had 145 fine needle aspiration biopsies, 70 mammograms, and 28 surgical biopsies, and after six months 73% (107/147) were declared cancer free. The follow up costs of the false positive screening results were Kr2.54m (£250 000) in the first round and Kr0.85m (£84 000) in the second round. Women under 50 accounted for about 41% of these costs. Conclusions—The examinations and investigations carried out after false positive mammography—especially in women under 50—and the cost of these procedures are a neglected but substantial problem.
BMJ: British Medical Journal © 1996 BMJ