Objectives To compare tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers and their relationship with breast density and AJCC prognostic stage. Materials and methods In this retrospective study, women screened with mammography between 1/4/2017 and 30/3/2020 at one site were included. Tumour characteristics were compared for screen-detected and interval cancers with breast density (Volpara) and AJCC (8th edition) prognostic stage for interval cancers. Categorical variables were compared using Pearson’s χ², Fisher’s exact, or binomial tests. Results From 55,010 attendees, 723 cancers were diagnosed (463 screen-detected; 260 interval). Time to interval cancer diagnosis was longer in women with dense breasts compared with non-dense breasts (median: 767 vs 624 days; p = 0.04). Earlier stage interval cancers ( < IIA) were more likely diagnosed in the second and third year compared to year 1 ((33/78) 48.7% and (56/129) 43.4% vs (12/53) 22.6%; p = 0.02). Retrospectively missed interval cancers were less frequent in women with dense breasts compared with true interval cancers (41.4% vs 71.9%); p < 0.01. Retrospectively missed intervals were more likely than true intervals to be grade 3 ((15/29) 51.7% vs (64/196) 32.7%, p = 1.00), lymph node positive ((12/29) 41.4% vs (70/196) 35.7%, p ≥ 0.7) and ≥ stage IIA ((14/29) 48.3% vs (72/196) 36.7%, ≥ IIA, p = 0.68). Conclusions The time to interval cancer diagnosis was longer for women with dense breasts. Interval cancers presenting within the first year after screening had the worst prognosis. Retrospectively missed interval cancers had worse prognostic features and were more likely in non-dense breasts. Key Points <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Question</Emphasis> To establish the relationship between screen-detected and interval cancers and breast density, and the prognosis of interval cancers depending on time of diagnosis and radiological signs. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Findings</Emphasis> Interval cancers presented later in women with dense breasts, but prognostically worse cancers presented earlier and were more likely to demonstrate retrospectively visible mammographic signs. <Emphasis Type="BoldItalic">Clinical relevance</Emphasis> Our finding that prognostically worse interval cancers were most likely in the first year after screening, and when radiological signs were retrospectively present, identifies an important opportunity for AI-based tools to enhance screening programmes. Graphical Abstract

A comparison of tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers and their relationship with breast density and AJCC prognostic stage in a UK screening cohort

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2026年5月6日

查看全文

Fleur Kilburn-Toppin,
Joshua Rothwell,
Nicholas R. Payne,
Yuan Huang,
Sarah E. Hickman,
Fiona J. Gilbert

摘要

Objectives

To compare tumour characteristics of screen-detected and interval cancers and their relationship with breast density and AJCC prognostic stage.

Materials and methods

In this retrospective study, women screened with mammography between 1/4/2017 and 30/3/2020 at one site were included. Tumour characteristics were compared for screen-detected and interval cancers with breast density (Volpara) and AJCC (8th edition) prognostic stage for interval cancers. Categorical variables were compared using Pearson’s χ², Fisher’s exact, or binomial tests.

Results

From 55,010 attendees, 723 cancers were diagnosed (463 screen-detected; 260 interval). Time to interval cancer diagnosis was longer in women with dense breasts compared with non-dense breasts (median: 767 vs 624 days; p = 0.04). Earlier stage interval cancers ( < IIA) were more likely diagnosed in the second and third year compared to year 1 ((33/78) 48.7% and (56/129) 43.4% vs (12/53) 22.6%; p = 0.02). Retrospectively missed interval cancers were less frequent in women with dense breasts compared with true interval cancers (41.4% vs 71.9%); p < 0.01. Retrospectively missed intervals were more likely than true intervals to be grade 3 ((15/29) 51.7% vs (64/196) 32.7%, p = 1.00), lymph node positive ((12/29) 41.4% vs (70/196) 35.7%, p ≥ 0.7) and ≥ stage IIA ((14/29) 48.3% vs (72/196) 36.7%, ≥ IIA, p = 0.68).

Conclusions

The time to interval cancer diagnosis was longer for women with dense breasts. Interval cancers presenting within the first year after screening had the worst prognosis. Retrospectively missed interval cancers had worse prognostic features and were more likely in non-dense breasts.

Key Points

Question To establish the relationship between screen-detected and interval cancers and breast density, and the prognosis of interval cancers depending on time of diagnosis and radiological signs.

Findings Interval cancers presented later in women with dense breasts, but prognostically worse cancers presented earlier and were more likely to demonstrate retrospectively visible mammographic signs.

Clinical relevance Our finding that prognostically worse interval cancers were most likely in the first year after screening, and when radiological signs were retrospectively present, identifies an important opportunity for AI-based tools to enhance screening programmes.

Graphical Abstract