Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 23732716.
- Also identified by DOI 10.7326/0003-4819-158-11-201306040-00008 and PMC identifier 3733533.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Knowledge of the likelihood that a screening-detected case of cancer has been overdiagnosed is vitally important to make treatment decisions and develop screening policy. An overdiagnosed case is an excess case detected by screening. Estimates of the frequency of overdiagnosis in breast and prostate cancer screening vary greatly across studies. This article identifies features of overdiagnosis studies that influence results and shows their effect by using published research. First, different ways to define and measure overdiagnosis are considered. Second, contextual features and how they affect overdiagnosis estimates are examined. Third, the effect of estimation approach is discussed. Many studies use excess incidence under screening as a proxy for overdiagnosis. Others use statistical models to make inferences about lead time or natural history and then derive the corresponding fraction of cases that are overdiagnosed. This article concludes with questions that readers of overdiagnosis studies can use to evaluate the validity and relevance of published estimates and recommends that authors of studies quantifying overdiagnosis provide information about these features.
Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
- Early Detection of Cancer
- Mass Screening
- Prostatic Neoplasms