UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: To compare one view (oblique) and two view (oblique and craniocaudal) mammography in breast cancer screening. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Nine breast screening centres in England. SUBJECTS: 40,163 women aged 50-64 attending their first breast screening examination. INTER...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wald, N, Murphy, P, Major, P, Parkes, C, Townsend, J, Frost, C
Format: Journal article
Language:English
Published: 1995
_version_ 1797105894756974592
author Wald, N
Murphy, P
Major, P
Parkes, C
Townsend, J
Frost, C
author_facet Wald, N
Murphy, P
Major, P
Parkes, C
Townsend, J
Frost, C
author_sort Wald, N
collection OXFORD
description OBJECTIVE: To compare one view (oblique) and two view (oblique and craniocaudal) mammography in breast cancer screening. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Nine breast screening centres in England. SUBJECTS: 40,163 women aged 50-64 attending their first breast screening examination. INTERVENTIONS: Women were randomised to have one view mammography, two view mammography, or two view mammography in which one view was read by one reader and both views were read by another. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of cancer detected, recall rates, cost per cancer detected, and marginal cost per extra cancer detected. RESULTS: Two view mammography detected 24% more women with breast cancer (95% confidence interval 16% to 31%) than one view mammography. Prevalence of detected cancer was 6.84 with two view mammography and 5.52 per 1000 women with one view. The proportion of women recalled for assessment was 15% lower (95% confidence interval 6% to 23%) with two view (6.97%) than with one view (8.16%) mammography. The cost of two view screening was higher (26.46 pounds compared with 22.00 pounds per examination) but the average cost per cancer detected was similar (5330 pounds compared with 5310 pounds) and the marginal cost per extra cancer detected with two views was similar to the average cost (5400 pounds). CONCLUSION: Two view mammography is medically more effective than one view; it detects more cancers and reduces recall rates; it is also similarly cost effective financially.
first_indexed 2024-03-07T06:53:53Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:fd76d8d9-0f93-41ae-b19e-b477096b0dd1
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T06:53:53Z
publishDate 1995
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:fd76d8d9-0f93-41ae-b19e-b477096b0dd12022-03-27T13:29:00ZUKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.Journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:fd76d8d9-0f93-41ae-b19e-b477096b0dd1EnglishSymplectic Elements at Oxford1995Wald, NMurphy, PMajor, PParkes, CTownsend, JFrost, COBJECTIVE: To compare one view (oblique) and two view (oblique and craniocaudal) mammography in breast cancer screening. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Nine breast screening centres in England. SUBJECTS: 40,163 women aged 50-64 attending their first breast screening examination. INTERVENTIONS: Women were randomised to have one view mammography, two view mammography, or two view mammography in which one view was read by one reader and both views were read by another. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence of cancer detected, recall rates, cost per cancer detected, and marginal cost per extra cancer detected. RESULTS: Two view mammography detected 24% more women with breast cancer (95% confidence interval 16% to 31%) than one view mammography. Prevalence of detected cancer was 6.84 with two view mammography and 5.52 per 1000 women with one view. The proportion of women recalled for assessment was 15% lower (95% confidence interval 6% to 23%) with two view (6.97%) than with one view (8.16%) mammography. The cost of two view screening was higher (26.46 pounds compared with 22.00 pounds per examination) but the average cost per cancer detected was similar (5330 pounds compared with 5310 pounds) and the marginal cost per extra cancer detected with two views was similar to the average cost (5400 pounds). CONCLUSION: Two view mammography is medically more effective than one view; it detects more cancers and reduces recall rates; it is also similarly cost effective financially.
spellingShingle Wald, N
Murphy, P
Major, P
Parkes, C
Townsend, J
Frost, C
UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title_full UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title_fullStr UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title_full_unstemmed UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title_short UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening.
title_sort ukcccr multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening
work_keys_str_mv AT waldn ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening
AT murphyp ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening
AT majorp ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening
AT parkesc ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening
AT townsendj ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening
AT frostc ukcccrmulticentrerandomisedcontrolledtrialofoneandtwoviewmammographyinbreastcancerscreening