COIOS
Healthcare today Item contradicts peer-reviewed

Reanalysed mammography trials are compatible with overdiagnosis below 5%

A reanalysis of randomised mammography trials, benchmarked against Denmark's Funen screening programme and adjusting for exit screening and follow-up timing, found excess-incidence patterns compatible with breast cancer overdiagnosis below 5%, against published estimates of up to 50%.

Published trial estimates of breast cancer overdiagnosis range from near zero to about 50%, differences the authors attribute to how exit screening in control arms and post-screening compensatory drops in incidence are handled. Reanalysing trial arms within a single framework, and comparing observed relative proportions of excess cumulative incidence with the temporal pattern seen in the population-based Funen programme in Denmark, 73 observed values across 52 timepoints matched the reference pattern for invasive cancer with and without DCIS. The authors read this as compatible with overall overdiagnosis below 5%.

Why it is interesting: Overdiagnosis is the central contested quantity in breast screening policy, and this reanalysis puts the trial evidence at the low end of a range that has spanned an order of magnitude.

Source
Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2026-09-14
DOI
10.1093/jnci/djag302
Type
Peer-reviewed article
Design
Unified reference-based reanalysis and meta-analysis of randomised mammography screening trials, 73 observed relative proportions across 52 follow-up timepoints, benchmarked against the Funen, Denmark service-screening programme
Verdict
Contradicts prior evidence
Driver
Cancer