U.S. Preventive Services Task Force banner
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Table 4. Benefits and Harms Comparison of Different Starting and Stopping Ages Using the Exemplar Modela

StrategyAverage Screenings per 1000 Women Potential Benefits (vs. No Screening) Potential Harms (vs. No Screening)b
Percentage of Mortality Reduction Cancer Deaths Averted per 1000 Women Life-Years Gained per 1000 Women False-Positive Results per 1000 Women Unnecessary Biopsies per 1000 Women
Comparison of different starting ages
Biennial screening
40-69 y 13,865 16c 6.1 120c 1,250 88
45-69 y 11,771 17c 6.2 116c 1,050 74
50-69 y 8,944 15 5.4 99 780 55
55-69 y 6,941 13 4.9 80 590 41
60-69 y 4,246 9 3.452 34024
Annual screening
40-69 y 27,583 22c 8.3 164c 2,250158
45-69 y 22,623 22c 8.0 152c 1,800126
50-69 y 17,759 20c 7.3 132c 1,350 95
55-69 y 13,003 16c 6.1 102c 950 67
60-69 y 8,406 12c 4.6 69c 600 42
Comparison of different stopping ages
Biennial
50-69 y 8,944 15 5.4 99 780 55
50-74 y 11,109 20 7.5 121 940 66
50-79 y 12,347 25 9.4 130 1,020 71
50-84 y 13,836 26 9.6 138 1,130 79
Annual
50-69 y 17,759 20c 7.3 132c 1,350 95
50-74 y 21,357 26c 9.5 156c 1,570 1106
50-79 y 24,439 30 11.1 170 1,740 122
50-84 y 26,913 33 12.2 178 1,880 132

a Results are from model S (Stanford University). Model S was chosen as an exemplar model to summarize the balance of benefits and harms associated with screening 1000 women under a particular screening strategy.
b Overdiagnosis is another significant harm associated with screening. However, given the uncertainty in the knowledge base about ductal carcinoma in situ and small invasive tumors, we felt that the absolute estimates are not reliable. In general, overdiagnosis increases with age across all age groups but increases more sharply for women who are screened in their 70s and 80s.
c Strategy is dominated by other strategies; the strategy that dominates may not be in this table.

Return to Document

 

 


USPSTF Program Office   540 Gaither Road, Rockville, MD 20850