Thirty years of population-based breast cancer screening in Iceland: a comparison of quality indicators and tumour characteristics between women aged 40–49 and 50–69 years
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/1651-226X.2025.44090Keywords:
Breast cancer, breast cancer screening, early detection of cancer, quality indicatorAbstract
Background and purpose: Organised mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 30–40% in women aged 50–69. Despite limited evidence for women aged 40–49, screening guidelines are trending toward younger ages. Iceland has offered biennial screening to women aged 40–69 since 1987. This study compares screening quality indicators and tumour characteristics between women aged 40–49 and 50–69 from 1990 to 2020.
Patient/material and methods: Screening-related data were obtained from the Icelandic Breast Cancer Screening Program, and breast cancer diagnoses and tumour characteristics were sourced from the Icelandic Cancer Registry.
Results: In total, 84,677 women aged 40–69 years attended 455,532 organised screening sessions in Iceland over a 30-year period. Women aged 40–49 years demonstrated higher recall rates (4.9% vs. 3.5%) and lower participation rates (60.7% vs. 61.5%), lower breast cancer detection rates (2.1 vs. 6.0/1,000), and lower episode sensitivity (54.8% vs. 70.5%), compared to those aged 50–69 years. Among screen-detected cases, women aged 40–49 years exhibited a higher proportion of tumours larger than 20 mm (29.7% vs. 21.7%), more lymph node positivity (41.2% vs. 28.2%) and higher human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positivity (18.6% vs. 11.8%), compared to those aged 50–69 years.
Interpretation: The disparity in breast cancer screening performances between the age groups may reflect unmodifiable factors in younger women. The presence of advanced tumour characteristics among women aged 40–49 years who attended screening indicates the importance of early detection for improving prognosis.
Downloads
References
Lauby-Secretan B, Scoccianti C, Loomis D, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Bouvard V, Bianchini F, et al. Breast-cancer screening – viewpoint of the IARC Working Group. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(24):2353–8.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1504363 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1504363
Coldman A, Phillips N, Wilson C, Decker K, Chiarelli AM, Brisson J, et al. Pan-Canadian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(11):dju261.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju261 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju261
Jonsson H, Törnberg S, Nyström L, Lenner P. Service screening with mammography of women aged 70–74 years in Sweden. Effects on breast cancer mortality. Cancer Detect Prev. 2003;27(5):360–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-090X(03)00131-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-090X(03)00131-4
Council of the European Union. Council Recommendation on strengthening prevention through early detection: a new EU approach on cancer screening replacing Council Recommendation 2003/878/EC [Internet]. 2022 [cited 2024 Jan 18]. Available from: https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-14770-2022-
INIT/en/pdf
U.S Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Breast cancer: screening [Internet]. 2024 [cited 2024 Nov 18]. Available from: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/breast-cancer-screening#bcei-recommendation-title-area
Woloshin S, Jørgensen KJ, Hwang S, Welch HG. The new USPSTF mammography recommendations – a dissenting view. N Engl J Med. 2023;389(12):1061–4.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2307229 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2307229
Biesheuvel C, Barratt A, Howard K, Houssami N, Irwig L. Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(12):1129–38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70380-7 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70380-7
De Gelder R, Heijnsdijk EAM, Van Ravesteyn NT, Fracheboud J, Draisma G, De Koning HJ. Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):111–21.
https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxr009 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxr009
Fredholm H, Eaker S, Frisell J, Holmberg L, Fredriksson I, Lindman H. Breast cancer in young women: poor survival despite intensive treatment. PLoS One. 2009;4(11):e7695.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007695 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007695
Jackson EB, Gondara L, Speers C, Diocee R, Nichol AM, Lohrisch C, et al. Does age affect outcome with breast cancer? Breast Edinb Scotl. 2023;70:25–31.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2023.06.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2023.06.001
Miglioretti DL, Zhu W, Kerlikowske K, Sprague BL, Onega T, Buist DSM, et al. Breast tumor prognostic characteristics and biennial vs annual mammography, age, and menopausal status. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(8):1069–77.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.3084 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.3084
Muratov S, Canelo-Aybar C, Tarride JE, Alonso-Coello P, Dimitrova N, Borisch B, et al. Monitoring and evaluation of breast cancer screening programmes: selecting candidate performance indicators. BMC Cancer. 2020;20(1):795.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07289-z DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07289-z
Von Karsa L, Dean P, Arrossi S, Sankaranarayanan R. Screening – principles. In: Stewart BW, Wild CP, editors. World cancer report. Lyon, France: IARC Press, 2014. p. 322–9.
Hagstofa Íslands. Mannfjöldi eftir kyni og aldri 1841–2025. Hagstofa Íslands [Internet]. [Uppfært 2025 mar 12]. Available from: https://px.hagstofa.is/pxis/pxweb/is/Ibuar/Ibuar__mannfjoldi__1_yfirlit__Yfirlit_mannfjolda/MAN00101.px/ [Cited date: 2 April 2025]
Hofvind S, Tsuruda K, Mangerud K, Ertzaas AK, Holen ÅS, Pedersen, K, et al. The Norwegian breast cancer screening program, 1996–2016: celebrating 20 years of organised mammographic screening. In: Cancer in Norway 2016 – Cancer incidence, mortality, survival and prevalence in Norway. Oslo: Solveig Hofvind, Cancer Registry of Norway; 2017:28.
Niraula S, Biswanger N, Hu P, Lambert P, Decker K. Incidence, characteristics, and outcomes of interval breast cancers compared with screening-detected breast cancers. JAMA Netw Open. 2020;3(9):e2018179.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.18179 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.18179
Perry N, Broeders M, De Wolf C, Törnberg S, Holland R, Von Karsa L. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition – summary document. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Oncol. 2008;19(4):614–22.
https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm481 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdm481
Njor SH, Heinävaara S, Stefansdóttir H, Nygård M, Guðmundsdóttir EM, Bhargava S, et al. Differences in mammography screening attendance among non-Western immigrants in Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway. Prev Med Rep. 2023;36:102516.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102516 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102516
Mandrik O, Tolma E, Zielonke N, Meheus F, Ordóñez-Reyes C, Severens JL, et al. Systematic reviews as a ‘lens of evidence’: determinants of participation in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen. 2021;28(2):70–9.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0969141320930743 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0969141320930743
Thy JE, Vigeland E, Larsen M, Hofvind S. Participation and cancer detection after reminders versus ordinary invitations in BreastScreen Norway. J Med Screen. 2022;29(3):178–84.
https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413221098839 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/09691413221098839
Krabbameinsskrá Íslands. Yfirlitsstölfræði [Internet]. Reykjavík: Krabbameinsfélagið; 2025 [cited 2025 May 5]. Available from: https://www.krabb.is/krabbamein/tolfraedi/krabbamein-og-
gaedaskraning/heildartolfraedi-meina
Souza FH, Wendland EM, Rosa MI, Polanczyk CA. Is full-field digital mammography more accurate than screen-film mammography in overall population screening? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2013;22(3):217–24.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2013.02.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2013.02.013
Bjørnson EW, Holen ÅS, Sagstad S, Larsen M, Thy J, Mangerud G, et al. Breast screen Norway: 25 years of organized screening [Internet]. Oslo: Cancer Registry of Norway; 2022. Available from: https://www.kreftregisteret.no/globalassets/mammografiprogrammet/rapporter-og-publikasjoner/2022-25-arsrapport_webversjon.pdf
Grabler P, Sighoko D, Wang L, Allgood K, Ansell D. Recall and cancer detection rates for screening mammography: finding the sweet spot. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(1):208–13.
https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.15987 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.15.15987
Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE. Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(7):502–10.
https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-146-7-200704030-00006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-146-7-200704030-00006
Miglioretti DL, Abraham L, Sprague BL, Lee CI, Bissell MCS, Ho TQH, et al. Association between false-positive results and return to screening mammography in the breast cancer surveillance consortium cohort. Ann Intern Med. 2024;177(10):1297–307.
https://doi.org/10.7326/M24-0123 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M24-0123
Larønningen S, Arvidsson G, Bray F, Dahl-Olsen ED, Engholm G, Ervik M, et al. NORDCAN: cancer incidence, mortality, prevalence and survival in the Nordic Countries, Version 9.5 (19.06.2025) [Internet]. Association of the Nordic Cancer Registries. Cancer Registry of Norway; 2025. [cited 2025 Jul 7] Available from: https://nordcan.iarc.fr/
Duffy SW, Gabe R. What should the detection rates of cancers be in breast screening programmes? Br J Cancer. 2005;92(3):597–600.
https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602345 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6602345
American College of Radiology website. BI-RADS®: follow-up and outcome monitoring [Internet]. Available from: www.acr.org/Quality-Safety/Resources/BIRADS/Monitoring
Tabár L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987;55(5):547–51.
https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1987.112 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1987.112
Bulliard JL, Sasieni P, Klabunde C, De Landtsheer JP, Yankaskas BC, Fracheboud J. Methodological issues in international comparison of interval breast cancers. Int J Cancer. 2006;119(5):1158–63.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.21941 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.21941
Hofvind S, Yankaskas BC, Bulliard JL, Klabunde CN, Fracheboud J. Comparing interval breast cancer rates in Norway and North Carolina: results and challenges. J Med Screen. 2009;16(3):131–9.
https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2009.009012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/jms.2009.009012
Houssami N, Hunter K. The epidemiology, radiology and biological characteristics of interval breast cancers in population mammography screening. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2017;3:12.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-017-0014-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-017-0014-x
Whitehead J, Carlile T, Kopecky KJ, Thompson DJ, Gilbert FIJ, Present AJ, et al. Wolfe mammographic parenchymal patterns. A study of the masking hypothesis of Egan and Mosteller. Cancer. 1985;56(6):1280–6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19850915)56:6<1280::AID-CNCR2820560610>3.0.CO;2-8
https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19850915)56:6%3C1280::AID-CNCR2820560610%3E3.0.CO;2-8
Sala E, Warren R, McCann J, Duffy S, Day N, Luben R. Mammographic parenchymal patterns and mode of detection: implications for the breast screening programme. J Med Screen. 1998;5(4):207–12.
https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.5.4.207 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.5.4.207
Anders CK, Johnson R, Litton J, Phillips M, Bleyer A. Breast cancer before age 40 years. Semin Oncol. 2009;36(3):237–49.
https://doi.org/10.1053/j.seminoncol.2009.03.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.seminoncol.2009.03.001
Lokate M, Stellato RK, Veldhuis WB, Peeters PHM, Van Gils CH. Age-related changes in mammographic density and breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(1):101–9.
https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kws446 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kws446
Checka CM, Chun JE, Schnabel FR, Lee J, Toth H. The relationship of mammographic density and age: implications for breast cancer screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(3):W292–5.
https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.6049 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.10.6049
Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(3):227–36.
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa062790 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa062790
Tabàr L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Gröntoft O. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin N Am. 1992;30(1):187–210.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-8389(22)02494-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0033-8389(22)02494-0
Frisell J, Lidbrink E. The Stockholm mammographic screening trial: risks and benefits in age group 40–49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:49–51.
https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.49 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.49
Bjurstam N, Björneld L, Duffy SW, Smith TC, Cahlin E, Eriksson O, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39–49 years at randomization. Cancer. 1997;80(11):2091–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971201)80:11<2091::AID-CNCR8>3.0.CO;2-#
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971201)80:11%3C2091::AID-CNCR8%3E3.0.CO;2-#
Bjurstam N, Björneld L, Warwick J, Sala E, Duffy SW, Nyström L, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial. Cancer. 2003;97(10):2387–96.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11361 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11361
International Agency for Research on Cancer. Breast cancer screening [Internet]. Lyon, FR: IARC Press; 2016. (IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention, No. 15). Available from: https://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Handbooks-Of-Cancer-Prevention/Breast-Cancer-Screening-2016
Walker MJ, Chiarelli AM, Knight JA, Mirea L, Glendon G, Ritvo P. Perceived risk and adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines among women with a familial history of breast cancer: a review of the literature. Breast Edinb Scotl. 2013;22(4):395–404.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2012.12.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2012.12.005
Mottram R, Knerr WL, Gallacher D, Fraser H, Al-Khudairy L, Ayorinde A, et al. Factors associated with attendance at screening for breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2021;11(11):e046660.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046660 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046660
Donley T, Tshiswaka DI, Blanc J, Seixas A, Okafor A, Mbizo J. Differences in breast and cervical cancer screening among U.S. women by nativity and family history. Am J Prev Med. 2020;59(4):578–87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.05.018 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.05.018
Vidarsdottir L, Olafsdottir EJ, Barkardottir RB, Bjarnadottir O, Jonasson JG, Sigurdsson S, et al. Estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer and adverse outcome in BRCA2 mutation carriers and young non-carrier patients. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2023;9(1):95.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-023-00600-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-023-00600-8
Yen MF, Tabár L, Vitak B, Smith RA, Chen HH, Duffy SW. Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 1990. 2003;39(12):1746–54.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00260-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00260-0
Ding L, Poelhekken K, Greuter MJW, Truyen I, De Schutter H, Goossens M, et al. Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer in population-based breast cancer screening: a short- and long-term perspective. Eur J Cancer Oxf Engl 1990. 2022;173:1–9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.06.027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.06.027
Allegra CJ, Aberle DR, Ganschow P, Hahn SM, Lee CN, Millon-Underwood S, et al. NIH state-of-the-science conference statement: diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2009;26(2):1–27.
Sigurdardottir LG, Jonasson JG, Stefansdottir S, Jonsdottir A, Olafsdottir GH, Olafsdottir EJ, et al. Data quality at the Icelandic Cancer Registry: comparability, validity, timeliness and completeness. Acta Oncol Stockh Swed. 2012;51(7):880–9.
https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2012.698751 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2012.698751
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Alfheidur Haraldsdottir, Helgi Birgisson , Agust I. Agustsson, Laufey Tryggvadottir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
