Stage Distribution at First and Repeat Examinations in Breast Cancer Screening

Published in: Journal of Medical Screening, v. 6, no. 3, Sep. 1999, p. 132-138

Posted on on January 01, 1999

by Rob Boer, Harry J. de Koning, Gerritt J van Oortmarssen, Peter Warmerdam, Paul J. van der Maas

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate observed stage distributions at first and repeat screenings. To compare the observed outcomes with expected values based on simulation modelling, varying the assumptions about the natural history of the disease. METHODS: An overview is made of observed data on stage distribution at first and repeat screenings and the difference between those distributions is summarised in a Gini coefficient. Four possible explanations for the observations are considered, two of these are worked out as Miscan simulation models, and the outcomes are compared with observations. RESULTS: Often the reported stage distributions at repeat screenings are not or only slightly more favourable than at first screenings and, in the ones that are more favourable, the difference is relatively small. If, in the Miscan model, it is assumed that there is no correlation between the duration of preclinical breast cancer in consecutive tumour size categories and that there is a strong influence of latent cancers, it is not possible to reproduce the observed outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The two modelled explanations are not sufficient. Decreasing sensitivity seems an unlikely explanation for the discrepancy in many screening programmes. The possibility that the observations may be explained because false reassurance has been given should be seriously considered and investigated.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.