Swedish Two-County Trial: Impact of Mammographic Screening on Breast Cancer Mortality during 3 Decades

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.11110469

The results of the Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening are qualitatively the same at 29-year follow-up as when they were first published: A substantial and significant reduction in breast cancer mortality was associated with an invitation to screening.


To estimate the long-term (29-year) effect of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in terms of both relative and absolute effects.

Materials and Methods

This study was carried out under the auspices of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. The board determined that, because randomization was at a community level and was to invitation to screening, informed verbal consent could be given by the participants when they attended the screening examination. A total of 133 065 women aged 40–74 years residing in two Swedish counties were randomized into a group invited to mammographic screening and a control group receiving usual care. Case status and cause of death were determined by the local trial end point committees and, independently, by an external committee. Mortality analysis was performed by using negative binomial regression.


There was a highly significant reduction in breast cancer mortality in women invited to screening according to both local end point committee data (relative risk [RR] = 0.69; 95% confidence interval: 0.56, 0.84; P < .0001) and consensus data (RR = 0.73; 95% confidence interval: 0.59, 0.89; P = .002). At 29 years of follow-up, the number of women needed to undergo screening for 7 years to prevent one breast cancer death was 414 according to local data and 519 according to consensus data. Most prevented breast cancer deaths would have occurred (in the absence of screening) after the first 10 years of follow-up.


Invitation to mammographic screening results in a highly significant decrease in breast cancer–specific mortality. Evaluation of the full impact of screening, in particular estimates of absolute benefit and number needed to screen, requires follow-up times exceeding 20 years because the observed number of breast cancer deaths prevented increases with increasing time of follow-up.

© RSNA, 2011


  • 1 Tabár L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, et al.. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;1(8433):829–832. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tabár L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE. The Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer: recent results and calculation of benefit. J Epidemiol Community Health 1989;43(2):107–114. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Tabár L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, et al.. Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age: new results from the Swedish Two-County Trial. Cancer 1995;75(10):2507–2517. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen HH, et al.. The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later: updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am 2000;38(4):625–651. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Tabár L, Vitak B, Yen MF, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Number needed to screen: lives saved over 20 years of follow-up in mammographic screening. J Med Screen 2004;11(3):126–129. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Duffy SW, Tabár L, Olsen AH, et al.. Absolute numbers of lives saved and overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening, from a randomized trial and from the Breast Screening Programme in England. J Med Screen 2010;17(1):25–30. [Published correction appears in J Med Screen 2010;17(2):106]. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 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 North Am 1992;30(1):187–210. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fagerberg CJG, Tabár L. The results of periodic one-view mammography screening in a randomized, controlled trial in Sweden. I. Background, organization, screening program, tumor findings. In: Day NEMiller AB, eds. Screening for breast cancer. Toronto, Canada: Hans Huber Publishers, 1988; 33–38. Google Scholar
  • 9 Nyström L, Rutqvist LE, Wall S, et al.. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 1993;341(8851):973–978. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 2002;359(9310):909–919. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Holmberg L, Duffy SW, Yen AM, et al.. Differences in endpoints between the Swedish W-E (two county) trial of mammographic screening and the Swedish overview: methodological consequences. J Med Screen 2009;16(2):73–80. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Cameron AC, Trivedi PK. Regression analysis of count data. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1998. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Smith RA, Duffy SW, Tabár L. Screening and early detection. In: Babiera GVEsteva FJSkoracki R, eds. Advanced therapy of breast disease. 3rd ed. Shelton, Conn: People’s Medical Publishing House, 2010. Google Scholar
  • 14 Keen JD. Promoting screening mammography: insight or uptake? J Am Board Fam Med 2010;23(6):775–782. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabár L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42(5):793–806, v. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wenkel E, Heckmann M, Heinrich M, et al.. Automated breast ultrasound: lesion detection and BI-RADS classification—a pilot study. Rofo 2008;180(9):804–808. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Duffy SW, Tabár L, Vitak B, et al.. The Swedish Two-County Trial of mammographic screening: cluster randomisation and end point evaluation. Ann Oncol 2003;14(8):1196–1198. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Nixon RM, Prevost TC, Duffy SW, Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH. Some random-effects models for the analysis of matched-cluster randomised trials: application to the Swedish two-county trial of breast-cancer screening. J Epidemiol Biostat 2000;5(6):349–358. MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gøtzsche PC, Olsen O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet 2000;355(9198):129–134. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;(4):CD001877. Google Scholar
  • 21 Freedman DA, Petitti DB, Robins JM. On the efficacy of screening for breast cancer. Int J Epidemiol 2004;33(1):43–55. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

Article History

Received March 22, 2011; revision requested April 14; revision received May 2; accepted May 3; final version accepted May 5.
Published online: Sept 2011
Published in print: Sept 2011