Screen‐detected breast cancer overdiagnosis occurs, but each woman has been diagnosed with cancer that cannot be ignored
There are an increasing number of publications estimating the extent of cancer overdiagnosis, which for breast cancer is in the context of population cancer screening programs.1 Researchers investigating overdiagnosis point to a range of related harms, but it is important to view these in the context of screening benefits, such as reductions in risk of breast cancer death.2 Care needs to be taken not to conflate formal screening programs with informal or opportunistic approaches to early detection, such as prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) testing in prostate cancer. This article focuses on the risk of overdiagnosis in the context of population‐based breast screening programs, given that overdiagnosis is often at the heart of calls to cease mammographic breast cancer screening.3,4 Despite the emphasis often given to breast cancer screening in discussions of overdiagnosis, the concept should not be regarded as only applying to breast cancer screening, or to cancer screening more generally, but as an outcome that could apply, to varying degrees, to a wider range of screening and diagnostic practices.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Glasziou PP, Jones MA, Pathirana T, et al. Estimating the magnitude of cancer overdiagnosis in Australia. Med J Aust 2020; 212: 163–168. https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2020/212/4/estimating-magnitude-cancer-overdiagnosis-australia
- 2. Lauby‐Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, et al. International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbook Working Group. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 2353–2358.
- 3. Burton R, Stevenson C. Assessment of breast cancer mortality trends associated with mammographic screening and adjuvant therapy from 1986 to 2013 in the state of Victoria, Australia. JAMA Netw Open 2020; 3: e208249.
- 4. Prosser Scully R. Should we scrap routine mammography? Medical Republic 2020; 30 June. http://medicalrepublic.com.au/should-we-scrap-routine-mammography/30841 (viewed Nov 2020).
- 5. Welch HG, Black WC. Overdiagnosis in cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010; 102: 605–613.
- 6. Cancer Australia. Overdiagnosis from mammographic screening [position statement]. Cancer Australia, 2014. https://www.canceraustralia.gov.au/publications-and-resources/position-statements/overdiagnosis-mammographic-screening (viewed Nov 2020).
- 7. Clinical Principal Committee, Standing Committee on Screening. Population Based Screening Framework. Canberra: Australian Government, Department of Health; 2018. https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/population-based-screening-framework (viewed Nov 2020).
- 8. Morrell S, Barratt A, Irwig L, et al. Estimates of overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer associated with screening mammography. Cancer Causes Control 2010; 21: 275–282.
- 9. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2019. BreastScreen Australia monitoring report 2019 [Cat. No. CAN 128]. Canberra: AIHW, 2019. https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/cancer-screening/breastscreen-australia-monitoring-report-2019/contents/table-of-contents (viewed Nov 2020).
- 10. Kanbayashi C, Thompson AM, Hwang ESS, et al. The international collaboration of active surveillance trials for low‐risk DCIS (LORIS, LORD, COMET, LORETTA). J Clin Oncol 2019; 37 (Suppl): TPS603.
Karen Canfell is the co‐principal investigator of an unrelated investigator‐initiated trial of cervical screening in Australia (Compass; ACTRN12613001207707 and NCT02328872), which is conducted and funded by the VCS Foundation — a government‐funded health promotion charity. The VCS Foundation received equipment and a funding contribution from Roche Molecular Systems and Ventana USA, but neither Karen Canfell nor her institution receives direct funding from industry for this trial or any other project. Dorothy Keefe is a consultant for Entrinsic Bioscience.