title: An audit of assessment procedures in women who develop breast cancer after a negative result.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  A case audit was undertaken to determine the extent to which the early diagnosis of cancer could be improved by better adherence to screening guidelines, and to estimate the effect that this might have on breast cancer survival. Although affecting only a small proportion of the cancers of the screening programme, this exercise had an educational function for screening radiologists.
  
  
  METHODS
  The East Anglian breast screening programme, a group of seven centres offering screening to a total population of 2.2 million inhabitants. Women were screened every three years between the ages of 50 and 64.
  
  
  METHODS
  Adherence to the guidelines of the UK National Breast Screening Programme (as published in 2001) was tested in women assessed between the start of screening on 1 April 1989 and 31 December 1999, in cases where the screen was negative but who were subsequently diagnosed with breast cancer.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In this period the programme screened 503,493 women, recalled 25,346 and diagnosed 3689 with cancer. 194 cancers in 193 women were reviewed, comprising those cancers that arose at the site of the lesion previously assessed. 96 women (49.5%) had calcifications, 48 (24.7%) had opacities. 139 of 194 cases were judged to have been inadequately assessed. A recurring theme showed that biopsies not undertaken or with false negative findings led to failure to diagnose lesions which were subsequently shown to be cancer. Microcalcifications and opacities were more likely to have been inadequately assessed than spiculate masses, parenchymal deformities, or asymmetric densities. In the earliest time period (1989-1993), there were a larger proportion of inadequately assessed cases than in the period 1994-1999.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Scrupulous adherence to good guidelines will result in a greater proportion of cancers being diagnosed. Failure to perform effective percutaneous biopsy was the usual cause of missed diagnoses. Although an infrequent occurrence this may have an effect on subsequent survival from breast cancer.
authors.affiliation: Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK. rmlw2@cam.ac.uk
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Warren
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Allgood
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Hunnam
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Godward
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Duffy
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000368:Aged; D001941:Breast Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000453:epidemiology*; D002114:Calcinosis / Q000453:epidemiology; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008403:Mass Screening / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards; D008485:Medical Audit / Q000592:standards*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013997:Time Factors; D006113:United Kingdom / Q000453:epidemiology