Zusammenfassung
Aus mehreren großen randomisierten Studien ist bekannt, dass durch regelmäßiges Mammographie-Screening die Brustkrebssterblichkeit gesenkt werden kann. Während in vielen Ländern seit Jahren Mammographie-Screening-Programme zur Brustkrebsfrüherkennung existieren, wird in Deutschland ein organisiertes Screening-Programm mit Bevölkerungsbezug erst jetzt aufgebaut. In dieser Übersichtsarbeit werden die einzelnen organisatorischen Aspekte eines Mammographie-Screening-Programms in Bezug auf ihre Auswirkungen auf das Kosten-Nutzen-Verhältnis analysiert und das geplante deutsche Screening-Programm im internationalen Vergleich dargestellt.
Abstract
It is well-known from several large randomized trials that regular mammography screening can reduce breast cancer mortality. While in many countries mammography screening programs have been in existence for quite some time, an organized population-based screening program is only now being implemented in Germany. In this review article, the different elements of a mammography screening program and their effect on the cost-benefit ratio are discussed and the planned German screening program is compared to the international programs.
Key words
Screening - breast - mammography - cost-benefit analysis
Literatur
-
1 Giersiepen K, Heitmann C, Janhsen K. et al .Brustkrebs. Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes, Heft 25. Berlin; Robert Koch-Institut 2005
-
2
Schön D, Bertz J, Görsch B. et al .
Die Dachdokumentation Krebs. Eine Surveillance-Einrichtung der Krebsregistrierung in Deutschland.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz.
2004;
47
429-436
-
3 IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Strategies. Breast Cancer Screening - IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention, Bd. 7. IARCPress Lyon; 2002
-
4
Shen Y, Yang Y, Inoue L Y. et al .
Role of detection method in predicting breast cancer survival: analysis of randomized screening trials.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2005;
97
1195-1203
-
5
Humphrey L L, Helfand M, Chan B K. et al .
Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U. S. Preventive Services Task Force.
Ann Intern Med.
2002;
137
347-360
-
6
Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen H H. et al .
The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up.
Radiol Clin North Am.
2000;
38
625-651
-
7
Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N. et al .
Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials.
Lancet.
2002;
359
909-919
-
8
Berry D A, Cronin K A, Plevritis S K. et al .
Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer.
N Engl J Med.
2005;
353
1784-1792
-
9
de Koning H J.
Breast cancer screening; cost-effective in practice?.
Eur J Radiol.
2000;
33
32-37
-
10
Säbel M, Aichinger U, Schulz-Wendtland R.
Die Strahlenexposition bei der Röntgen-Mammographie.
Fortschr Röntgenstr.
2001;
173
79-91
-
11
Young K C, Burch A, Oduko J M.
Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 2001 and 2002.
Br J Radiol.
2005;
78
207-218
-
12 Blendl C, Hermann K P, Mertelmeier T. PAS 1054, Anforderung und Prüfverfahren für digitale Mammographie-Einrichtungen. Berlin; Beuth 2005
-
13
Jung H.
Mammography and radiation risk.
Fortschr Röntgenstr.
1998;
169
336-343
-
14
Law J, Faulkner K.
Cancers detected and induced, and associated risk and benefit, in a breast screening programme.
Br J Radiol.
2001;
74
1121-1127
-
15 Hahn C, Gumprecht D. (eds) .Mammographie-Screening in Deutschland: Bewertung des Strahlenrisikos. Stellungnahme der Strahlenschutzkommission mit wissenschaftlicher Begründung. Berichte der Strahlenschutzkommission, Heft 31. Bonn; Strahlenschutzkommission 2002
-
16
Beckett J R, Kotre C J, Michaelson J S.
Analysis of benefit: risk ratio and mortality reduction for the UK Breast Screening Programme.
Br J Radiol.
2003;
76
309-320
-
17
National Cancer Intelligence Centre - Office for National Statistics. Update to Cancer Trends in England and Wales 1950 - 1999.
2005 (zitiert am 8.5.2006);
, www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_health/CancerTrendsUpdates.pdf
-
18
Epidemiologisches Krebsregister Saarland. Interaktive Datenbank.
2006 (zitiert am 30.3.2006);
, www.krebsregister.saarland.de/datenbank/datenbank.html
-
19
Duffy S W.
Some current issues in breast cancer screening.
J Med Screen.
2005;
12
128-133
-
20
Ernster V L, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow W E. et al .
Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2002;
94
1546-1554
-
21
Erbas B, Provenzano E, Armes J. et al .
The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a review.
Breast Cancer Res Treat.
2006;
97
135-144
-
22
Sanders M E, Schuyler P A, Dupont W D. et al .
The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up.
Cancer.
2005;
103
2481-2484
-
23
Evans A J, Blanks R G.
Should breast screening programmes limit their detection of ductal carcinoma in situ?.
Clin Radiol.
2002;
57
1086-1089
-
24
Elmore J G, Barton M B, Moceri V M. et al .
Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations.
N Engl J Med.
1998;
338
1089-1096
-
25
Maes R M, Dronkers D J, Hendriks J H. et al .
Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment?.
Br J Radiol.
1997;
70
34-38
-
26
Otten J D, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks J H. et al .
Effect of recall rate on earlier screen detection of breast cancers based on the Dutch performance indicators.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2005;
97
748-754
-
27
Yankaskas B C, Cleveland R J, Schell M J. et al .
Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography.
AJR Am J Roentgenol.
2001;
177
543-549
-
28
Carney P A, Miglioretti D L, Yankaskas B C. et al .
Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography.
Ann Intern Med.
2003;
138
168-175
-
29
Bird R E, Wallace T W, Yankaskas B C.
Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography.
Radiology.
1992;
184
613-617
-
30
Warren R M, Young J R, McLean L. et al .
Radiology review of the UKCCCR Breast Screening Frequency Trial: potential improvements in sensitivity and lead time of radiological signs.
Clin Radiol.
2003;
58
128-132
-
31
Moss S M, Brown J, Garvican L. et al .
Routine breast screening for women aged 65 - 69: results from evaluation of the demonstration sites.
Br J Cancer.
2001;
85
1289-1294
-
32
Kerlikowske K, Salzmann P, Phillips K A. et al .
Continuing screening mammography in women aged 70 to 79 years: impact on life expectancy and cost-effectiveness.
JAMA.
1999;
282
2156-2163
-
33
Tabar L, Faberberg G, Day N E. 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.
Br J Cancer.
1987;
55
547-551
-
34
Moss S, Waller M, Anderson T J. et al .
Randomised controlled trial of mammographic screening in women from age 40: predicted mortality based on surrogate outcome measures.
Br J Cancer.
2005;
92
955-960
-
35
Schmutzler R K, Beckmann M W, Kiechle M.
Familiäres Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinom. Vorschlag für ein strukturiertes Früherkennungsprogramm.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt.
2002;
99
A1372-A1378
-
36
The Breast Screening Frequency Trial Group .
The frequency of breast cancer screening: results from the UKCCCR Randomised Trial.
Eur J Canc.
2002;
38
1458-1464
-
37
Wald N J, Murphy P, Major P. et al .
UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
BMJ.
1995;
311
1189-1193
-
38
Elmore J G, Armstrong K, Lehman C D. et al .
Screening for breast cancer.
JAMA.
2005;
293
1245-1256
-
39
Thomas D B, Gao D L, Self S G. et al .
Randomized trial of breast self-examination in shanghai: methodology and preliminary results.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
1997;
89
355-365
-
40
Thurfjell E L, Lernevall K A, Taube A AS.
Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program.
Radiology.
1994;
191
241-244
-
41
Duijm L E, Groenewoud J H, Hendriks J H. et al .
Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements.
Radiology.
2004;
231
564-570
-
42
Lagerlund M, Sparen P, Thurfjell E. et al .
Predictors of non-attendance in a population-based mammography screening programme; socio-demographic factors and aspects of health behaviour.
Eur J Cancer Prev.
2000;
9
25-33
-
43
Graf O, Obermayer M, Scheurecker A. et al .
Diagnoseform und Tumorstadien von Mammakarzinomen unter Bedingungen des opportunistischen Screenings.
Fortschr Röntgenstr.
2006;
178
221-226
-
44 Perry N, Broeders M, de Wolf C. et al. (eds) .European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 4th edition. Luxembourg; Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2006
-
45
Blendl C, Klug A, Lohmann R. et al .
Ergebnisse aus drei Monaten Konstanzprüfung an Röntgeneinrichtungen im Bayerischen Mammographie-Screening.
Fortschr Röntgenstr.
2004;
176
1157-1166
-
46
Moreira C, Svoboda K, Poulos A. et al .
Comparison of the validity and reliability of two image classification systems for the assessment of mammogram quality.
J Med Screen.
2005;
12
38-42
-
47
Moss S M, Blanks R G, Bennett R L.
Is radiologists’ volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature.
Clin Radiol.
2005;
60
623-626
-
48
Theberge I, Hebert-Croteau N, Langlois A. et al .
Volume of screening mammography and performance in the Quebec population-based Breast Cancer Screening Program.
CMAJ.
2005;
172
195-199
-
49
Barlow W E, Chi C, Carney P A. et al .
Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2004;
96
1840-1850
-
50
Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C. et al. (eds) .
Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationships.
J Natl Cancer Inst.
2002;
94
369-375
-
51
Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung .
Einführung eines bundesweiten Mammographie-Screening-Programms.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt.
2004;
101
Beilage Heft 4
-
52 Frischbier H J, Hoeffken W, Robra B P. et al. (eds) .Mammographie in der Krebsfrüherkennung: Qualitätssicherung und Akzeptanz. Ergebnisse der Deutschen Mammographie-Studie. Stuttgart; Enke 1994
-
53
Junkermann H, Reichel M, Hecht G. et al .
Ist eine deutliche Senkung der Brustkrebssterblichlichkeit durch Mammographiescreening in Deutschland erreichbar?.
Senologie.
2005;
2
172
-
54
von Karsa L, Wülfing U.
Stand der Modellprojekte zur Einführung des qualitätsgesicherten Mammographie-Screenings in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
2002 (zitiert am 8.5.2006);
, www.kooperationsgemeinschaft-mammographie.de/mammographie_screening/download/zwischenbericht_modellprojekte1.pdf
-
55 Patnick J. NHS Breast Screening Programme Annual Review 2005. Sheffield; NHSBSP 2005
-
56 Public Health Agency of Canada. Organized Breast Cancer Screening Programs in Canada - Report on Program Performance in 2001 and 2002. Public Health Agency of Canada Ottawa; 2005
-
57 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. BreastScreen Australia monitoring report 2002 - 2003. Cancer series No. 32. Canberra; Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2006
-
58
Swan J, Breen N, Coates R J. et al .
Progress in cancer screening practices in the United States: results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey.
Cancer.
2003;
97
1528-1540
-
59
EUSOMA .
The requirements of a specialist breast unit.
Eur J Canc.
2000;
36
2288-2293
-
60
Pisano E D, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E. et al .
Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.
N Engl J Med.
2005;
353
1773-1783
-
61
Pisano E D, Yaffe M J.
Digital mammography.
Radiology.
2005;
234
353-362
-
62
Speit G, Trenz K.
Chromosomal mutagen sensitivity associated with mutations in BRCA genes.
Cytogenet Genome Res.
2004;
104
325-332
-
63
Li J, Zhang Z, Rosenzweig J. et al .
Proteomics and bioinformatics approaches for identification of serum biomarkers to detect breast cancer.
Clin Chem.
2002;
48
1296-1304
-
64
Kuhl C K, Schrading S, Weigel S. et al .
Die „EVA”-Studie: Evaluierung der Leistungsfähigkeit diagnostischer Verfahren (Mammographie, Sonographie, MRT) zur sekundären und tertiären Prävention des familiären Mammakarzinoms - Zwischenergebnisse nach der ersten Hälfte der Förderungsperiode.
Fortschr Röntgenstr.
2005;
177
818-827
Prof. Ulrich Bick
Institut für Radiologie, Charité Campus Mitte
Schumannstraße 20/21
10115 Berlin
Phone: ++49/30/4 50 52 70 01
Fax: ++49/30/4 50 52 79 68
Email: Ulrich.Bick@charite.de
