Download PDF
Rofo 2006; 178(10): 957-969
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-926959
Übersicht

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Mammographie-Screening in Deutschland:
Wie, wann und warum?

Mammography Screening in Germany: How, When and Why?U. Bick1
  • 1Institut für Radiologie, Charité Campus Mitte
Further Information

Publication History

eingereicht: 3.4.2006

angenommen: 25.4.2006

Publication Date:
04 October 2006 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

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
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Cancer-Preventive Strategies. Breast Cancer Screening - IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention, Bd. 7. IARCPress Lyon; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 de Koning H J. Breast cancer screening; cost-effective in practice?.  Eur J Radiol. 2000;  33 32-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Säbel M, Aichinger U, Schulz-Wendtland R. Die Strahlenexposition bei der Röntgen-Mammographie.  Fortschr Röntgenstr. 2001;  173 79-91
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Blendl C, Hermann K P, Mertelmeier T. PAS 1054, Anforderung und Prüfverfahren für digitale Mammographie-Einrichtungen. Berlin; Beuth 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Jung H. Mammography and radiation risk.  Fortschr Röntgenstr. 1998;  169 336-343
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Epidemiologisches Krebsregister Saarland. Interaktive Datenbank.  2006 (zitiert am 30.3.2006);  , www.krebsregister.saarland.de/datenbank/datenbank.html
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Duffy S W. Some current issues in breast cancer screening.  J Med Screen. 2005;  12 128-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Bird R E, Wallace T W, Yankaskas B C. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography.  Radiology. 1992;  184 613-617
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Schmutzler R K, Beckmann M W, Kiechle M. Familiäres Mamma- und Ovarialkarzinom. Vorschlag für ein strukturiertes Früherkennungsprogramm.  Deutsches Ärzteblatt. 2002;  99 A1372-A1378
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Elmore J G, Armstrong K, Lehman C D. et al . Screening for breast cancer.  JAMA. 2005;  293 1245-1256
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Kassenärztliche Bundesvereinigung . Einführung eines bundesweiten Mammographie-Screening-Programms.  Deutsches Ärzteblatt. 2004;  101 Beilage Heft 4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Junkermann H, Reichel M, Hecht G. et al . Ist eine deutliche Senkung der Brustkrebssterblichlichkeit durch Mammographiescreening in Deutschland erreichbar?.  Senologie. 2005;  2 172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Patnick J. NHS Breast Screening Programme Annual Review 2005. Sheffield; NHSBSP 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    Google Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 EUSOMA . The requirements of a specialist breast unit.  Eur J Canc. 2000;  36 2288-2293
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Pisano E D, Yaffe M J. Digital mammography.  Radiology. 2005;  234 353-362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Speit G, Trenz K. Chromosomal mutagen sensitivity associated with mutations in BRCA genes.  Cytogenet Genome Res. 2004;  104 325-332
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 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
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar

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

      >