1. Organising screening programmes
Recommendations
How should a breast cancer screening programme be implemented?
As an organised screening programme for early detection of breast cancer in women who do not have symptoms of breast cancer, as recommended by the ECIBC's Guidelines Development Group (GDG).
Within an organised screening programme, how should mammograms be read?
Radiologists should read between 3,500 and 11,000 mammograms annually and use double reading.
What would following these recommendations mean for you?
If you live in a country with an organised screening programme, you might be invited to screening. If you receive an invitation, you can speak with your healthcare professional about the benefits and harms of attending screening.
Additional considerations
Within an organised screening programme, more women are likely to be correctly diagnosed and fewer told they have breast cancer when in reality they do not.
Using double reading, that is a mammogram read independently by two radiologists, in an organised screening programme probably finds slightly more breast cancers, and slightly decreases the number of cancers diagnosed with symptoms in the interval between the scheduled screening appointments. Also, probably slightly more women are correctly diagnosed (when using double reading).
Double reading may slightly increase the chances of receiving a false positive screening result, which means a woman would have further tests after screening. These tests will confirm that she does not have cancer, but she may have suffered unnecessary anxiety and distress.
In addition, when radiologists read between 3,500 and 11,000 mammograms annually, there may be more women correctly diagnosed and fewer women told they have breast cancer when in reality they do not. However, the evidence is very uncertain.
The GDG noted that the costs would be higher when using double reading and that the availability of specialist training varies according to the country.
Definitions
Organised screening is a type of screening programme where additional procedures (e.g. standard operating procedures) are specified and where a team at national or regional level is responsible for implementing the policy, i.e. for coordinating the delivery of screening services, maintaining requisite quality, and reporting on performances and results.
Opportunistic or non-organised screening refers to all other screening where examinations for early detection of cancer are performed in a diagnostic or clinical setting, independent from the public screening policy (if existing).
Double reading refers to mammograms been read, generally independently, by two radiologists. If there is disagreement about the result, these mammograms can be reviewed by a third radiologist (arbitration) or can be discussed by the two radiologists to reach consensus.
- Organised vs. non-organised screening
- Double vs. single reading in mammograpy screening
- Communication skills training
- Communication with care providers
- Optimal number of mammography readings
- Specialised training
- Risk stratification
- Women aged 40-44: screening vs. no screening
- Women aged 45-49: screening vs. no screening
- Women aged 45-49: annual vs. biennial screening
- Women aged 45-49: annual vs. triennial screening
- Women aged 45-49: triennial vs. biennial screening
- Women aged 50-69: screening vs. no screening
- Women aged 50-69: annual vs. biennial screening
- Women aged 50-69: annual vs. triennial screening
- Women aged 50-69: triennial vs. biennial screening
- Women aged 70-74: screening vs. no screening
- Women aged 70-74: annual vs. biennial screening
- Women aged 70-74: annual vs. triennial screening
- Women aged 70-74: triennial vs. biennial screening
- Single reading with AI support
- Double reading with AI support
- Screening with tomosynthesis vs. mammography
- Screening with tomosynthesis plus mammography vs. mammography alone
- Tailored screening with tomosynthesis
- Screening with tomosynthesis vs. mammography
- Tailored screening with MRI
- Tailored screening with ABUS
- Tailored screening with HHUS
- Informing about benefits and harms: use of decision aids
- Informing about benefits and harms: Numbers in addition to plain language
- Informing about benefits and harms: Infographics in addition to plain language
- Informing about benefits and harms: Story telling in addition to plain language
- Inviting women to screening: letter vs. no invitation
- Inviting socially disadvantaged women to screening: Targeted vs. general communication strategy
- Inviting women with an intellectual disability to screening
- Inviting non-native speakers to screening
- Inviting socially disadvantaged women to screening: Tailored vs. targeted communication strategy
- Inviting socially disadvantaged women to screening: Tailored vs. general communication strategy
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter vs. no invitation
- Inviting women to screening: letter with fixed appointment vs. letter
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter with fixed appointment vs. lett
- Inviting women to screening: letter with GP signature vs. letter
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter with GP signature vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by phone call vs. letter
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter followed by phone call vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by phone call vs. no invitation
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by written reminder vs. letter
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter followed by written reminder vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by face to face intervention vs. letter
- Inviting women to subsequent screening rounds: letter followed by face to face intervention vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: e-mail vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: automated telephone call vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by automated telephone call vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by SMS notification vs. letter
- Inviting women to screening: letter followed by personalised phone call vs. automated phone call
- Negative result: letter vs. nothing
- Further assessment: letter followed by a phone call
- Further assessment: timing of results
- Negative result: phone call vs. letter
- Negative result: face to face interview vs. letter
- Negative result: timing of results
- Tomosynthesis vs. assessment mammography
- Obtaining a sample from a suspicious breast lesion
- Type of guidance for needle core biopsy
- Stage 1: conventional exams
- Stage 1: PET-CT exams
- Stage 2: conventional exams
- Stage 2: PET-CT exams
- Stage 3: conventional exams
- Stage 3: PET-CT exams
- Stage 3: conventional exams plus PET-CT
- Use of clip-marking
- Additional magnetic resonance imaging
- Contrast-enhanced mammography
- Threshold of oestrogen for endocrine therapy
- Threshold of progesterone for endocrine therapy
- Multigene testing: 70 gene signature at low clinical risk
- Multigene testing: 70 gene signature at high clinical risk
- Multigene testing: 21 gene recurrence score
- Organising screening programmes
- Risk stratification
- Women 40-44
- Women 45-49
- Women 50-69
- Women 70-74
- Women with high breast density
- General Population
- Vulnerable Population
- Informing women about their results
- Women recalled due to suspicious lesions
- Obtaining a sample from a suspicious lesion
- Type of guidance for needle core biopsy
- Stage 1
- Stage 2
- Stage 3
- Planning surgical treatment
- Hormone receptor to guide use of endocrine therapy
- Multigene testing to guide use of chemotherapy