Although the two Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS) trials were performed 40 years ago, their negative findings continue to heavily influence screening policies around the world. These policies, based on underestimates of the mortality reduction attributable to mammography particularly for women in the 40-49-year age range, contribute to increased mortality and morbidity from breast cancer. This review summarizes principles of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and evaluates the compliance of the CNBSS1 and CNBSS2 RCTs in the context of these principles. We describe the fundamental flaws of the CNBSS trials, which failed to demonstrate mortality benefit of screening mammography and contribute to their being the only two outlier studies of eight screening mammography RCTs. The most significant flaws of the trials are (1) inadequate power to detect significant differences in breast cancer mortality; (2) very poor quality mammography with low sensitivity and cancer detection rates; (3) inclusion of women with symptoms of breast cancer; and (4) study design that allowed for violation of the randomization of the allocation process. Finally, we demonstrate that the conditions of the screening intervention in the CNBSS do not reflect the environment of modern population-based screening mammography programs.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbab099 | DOI Listing |
BJR Open
September 2023
American Cancer Society, Atlanta GA, USA.
Objectives: To identify issues of principle and practice giving rise to misunderstandings in reviewing evidence, to illustrate these by reference to the Nordic Cochrane Review (NCR) and its interpretation of two trials of mammographic screening, and to draw lessons for future reviewing of published results.
Methods: A narrative review of the publications of the Nordic Cochrane Review of mammographic screening (NCR), the Swedish Two-County Trial (S2C) and the Canadian National Breast Screening Study 1 and 2 (CNBSS-1 and CNBSS-2).
Results: The NCR concluded that the S2C was unreliable, despite the review's complaints being shown to be mistaken, by direct reference to the original primary publications of the S2C.
J Breast Imaging
April 2022
University of Toronto, Department of Medical Biophysics, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Objective: To investigate why the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS) did not show mortality reduction with mammography. This study explored long-standing concerns related to the validity of the randomization process, methods of recruiting women to participate in the trials, and training of the staff working in the CNBSS.
Methods: Surviving former CNBSS personnel, whose roles involved direct recruitment, enrollment, randomization, clinical examination, image interpretation, and management of patients in the CNBSS were interviewed.
J Breast Imaging
April 2022
University of Toronto Physical Sciences Platform, Department of Medical Biophysics, Sunnybrook Research Institute Sunnybrook Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Although the two Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS) trials were performed 40 years ago, their negative findings continue to heavily influence screening policies around the world. These policies, based on underestimates of the mortality reduction attributable to mammography particularly for women in the 40-49-year age range, contribute to increased mortality and morbidity from breast cancer. This review summarizes principles of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and evaluates the compliance of the CNBSS1 and CNBSS2 RCTs in the context of these principles.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Med Screen
June 2021
Department of Radiology, 1811Harvard Medical School, Waban, MA, USA.
Despite overwhelming evidence of a major reduction in deaths, the debate about the efficacy of breast cancer screening has continued for over 50 years. The poor results in the Canadian National Breast Screening Studies (CNBSS) have been used to challenge the benefits shown by the other randomized, controlled trials. They continue to be used in assessing the value of breast cancer screening despite their unblinded allocation process, which first identified women with breast abnormalities and then assigned them on open lists allowing for nonrandom assignment, compromising the trials and rendering their results unreliable.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!