A Note on the Cost-Benefit Problem in Screening for Breast Cancer

The strategy of early recognition and treatment of breast cancer by mass screening, practised and discussed for a number of years, is a diagnostic method whose evaluation still encounters considerable difficulties. These derive mainly from problems in the interpretation of success statistics, survival rates for a number of women, identified as »cases« who had volunteered for, or refused breast screening, or were kept as controls. With a series of biometrical arguments and very crude cost estimates, the author gets the impression that survival results would justify the increased costs that might result from mass screening.

Die seit einigen Jahren praktizierte und diskutierte Strategie der Früherkennung und -behandlung des Brustkrebses durch Massenuntersuchungen ist eine diagnostische Methode, deren Auswertung immer noch erhebliche Schwierigkeiten bereitet, Diese stammen hauptsächlich aus der Problematik der heute zur Verfügung stehenden Erfolgsstatistiken, der überlebensraten für eine Anzahl von identifizierten »Fällen«, die sich solchen Massenuntersuchungen unterzogen oder entzogen haben oder — als Kontrollen — zur Untersuchung nicht ermuntert wurden. Anhand einer Reihe von biometrischen Argumenten und sehr groben Kostenschätzungen gewinnt der Autor den Eindruck, daß die Resultate die mit solcher Massenuntersuchung verbundenen zusätzlichen Kosten rechtfertigen.

Key-words

Cost-Benefit - Breast Cancer - Screening

Schlüssel-Wörter

Kosten/Erfolgs-Rechnung - Brustkrebs - Massenuntersuchung

• References

• 1 Baum M, Edwards M. H. Management of Early Carcinoma of the Breast. Lancet 02 1972; 85.
• 2 Berkson J, Gage R. P. Survival Curve for Cancer Patients Following Treatment. J. Amer. Statist. Ass 47 1952; 501-555.
• 3 Boag J. W. Maximum Likelihood Estimates of the Proportion of Patients Cured by Cancer Therapy. J. roy. Statist. Soc. B 11 1949; 15-53.
• 4 Bhoss I. D. J. Statistical Criticism. Cancer 13 1960; 394-400.
• 5 Chu J. T. Some Decision Making Methods Applicable to the Medical Sciences. Proc. 5th Berkeley Symp. on Math. Stat. and Prob. Vol. IV, 867-886 Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press; 1967
• 6 Collen M. F. Periodic Health Examinations Using an Automated Multitest Laboratory. J. Amer. med. Ass 195 1966; 830-833.
• 7 Collen M. F, Feldman R, Siegelaub A. B, Crawford D. Dollar Cost per Positive Test for Automated Multiphasic Screening. New Engl. J. Med 283 1970; 459-463.
• 8 Dowdy A. H, Barber W. F, Lagasse L. D, Sperling L, Zeldis L. J, Longmire W. P. Mammography as a Screening Method for the Examination of Large Populations. Cancer 28 1971; 1558-1562.
• 9 Dunn Jr J. E.. The Relationship between Carcinoma in situ and Invasive Cervical Carcinoma. Cancer 06 1953; 873-886.
• 10 Dunn Jr J. E.. Preliminary Findings of the MemphisShelby County Uterine Cancer Study and their Interpretation. Amer. J. Publ. Hlth 48 1958; 861-873.
• 11 Feinleib M, Zelen M. Some Pitfalls in the Evaluation of Screening Programs. Arch. Environm. Hlth 19 1969; 412-415.
• 12 Flagle C. D. A Decision Theoretical Comparison of Three Procedures of Screening for a Single Disease. Proc. 5th Berkeley Symp. on Math. Stat. and Prob. Vol. IV, 887-901 Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press; 1967
• 13 Garfield S. R. Multiphasic Health Testing and Medical Care as a Right. New Engl. J. Med 283 1970; 1087-1089.
• 14 Griesbach W. A, Eads W. S. Experience with Screening for Breast Carcinoma. Cancer 39 1966; 1548-1550.
• 15 Gory G. A, Barnett G. O. Experience with a Model of Sequential Diagnosis. Comp. Biomed. Res 01 1968; 490-507.
• 16 Hutchison G. B, Shapiro S. Lead Time Gained by Diagnostic Screening for Breast Cancer. J. nat. Cancer Inst 41 1968; 665-681.
• 17 Jacquez J. A.. (Edit.): Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Diagnostic Process, held at the University of Michigan, 1971. Fort Lauderdale: Charles C. Thomas; in press).
• 18 Jesdinsky H. J. Diagnose-Modelle in der Medizin. Meth. Inform. Med 11 1972; 48-59.
• 19 Kodlin D. Survival Time Analysis for Treatment Evaluation in Cancer Therapy. Cancer Research 21 1961; 1103-1107.
• 20 Kodlin D, Collen M. F. Automated Diagnosis in Multiphasic Screening. Proc. 6th Berkeley Symp. on Math. Stat. and Prob. Vol. IV. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press; 1972
• 21 Lusted L. B. Decision-making Studies in Patient Management. New Engl. J. Med 284 1971; 416-424.
• 22 Ramcharan S, Cutler J. L, Feldman R, Siegelaub A. B, Campbell B, Friedman G. D, Dales L, Collen M. F. Kaiser-Permanente Multiphasic Health Checkup Evaluation Project: 2. Disability and Chronic Disease after Seven Years of Multiphasic Health Checkups. Paper read before 99th Annual Meeting. American Publ. Health Assoc. Minneapolis, Minn. Oct. 11, 1971 (To appear in Preventive Medicine).
• 23 Strax P. New Techniques in Mass Screening for Breast Cancer. Cancer 28 1971; 1563-1568.
• 24 Taylor T. R, Shields S, Black R. Study of CostConscious Computer-Assisted Diagnosis in Thyroid Disease. Lancet 02 1972; 79-83.
• 25 U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States 1970. (91st Edition). Table 67. Washington, D.C: 1970
• 26 U.S. Dept, of Health, Education and Welfare. Program Analysis 1966–3. Disease Control Programs. Cancer. October 1966 52 Washington, D.C: 1966
• 27 Venet L, Strax P, Venet W, Shapiro S. Adequacies and Inadequacies of Breast Examinations by Physicians in Mass Screening. Cancer 28 1971; 1546-1551.
• 28 Wolfe J. N. Mammography as a Screening Examination in Breast Cancer. Radiology 84 1965; 704-708.
• 29 Zelen M, Feinleib M. On the Theory of Screening for Chronic Diseases. Biometrika 56 1969; 601-614.