Donella Puliti

Dr. Donella Puliti

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2014 in The Lancet
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FSFritz H Schröder
Fritz H Schröder
JHJonas Hugosson
Jonas Hugosson
Monique RoobolMonique Roobol
Monique Roobol
TTTeuvo L J Tammela
Teuvo L J Tammela
MZMarco Zappa
Marco Zappa
AAAnssi Auvinen
Anssi Auvinen

12 September 2012 in Journal of Medical Screening
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DPDonella Puliti
Donella Puliti
SDStephen W Duffy
Stephen W Duffy
GMGuido Miccinesi
Guido Miccinesi
HKHarry De Koning
Harry De Koning
ELElsebeth Lynge
Elsebeth Lynge
EPEugenio Paci
Eugenio Paci
Objectives: Overdiagnosis, the detection through screening of a breast cancer that would never have been identified in the lifetime of the woman, is an adverse outcome of screening. We aimed to determine an estimate range for overdiagnosis of breast cancer in European mammographic service screening programmes. Methods: We conducted a literature review of observational studies that provided estimates of breast cancer overdiagnosis in European population-based mammographic screening programmes. Studies were classified according to the presence and the type of adjustment for breast cancer risk (data, model and covariates used), and for lead time (statistical adjustment or compensatory drop). We expressed estimates of overdiagnosis from each study as a percentage of the expected incidence in the absence of screening, even if the variability in the age range of the denominator could not be removed. Estimates including carcinoma in situ were considered when available. Results: There were 13 primary studies reporting 16 estimates of overdiagnosis in seven European countries (the Netherlands, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, UK and Spain). Unadjusted estimates ranged from 0% to 54%. Reported estimates adjusted for breast cancer risk and lead time were 2.8% in the Netherlands, 4.6% and 1.0% in Italy, 7.0% in Denmark and 10% and 3.3% in England and Wales. Conclusions: The most plausible estimates of overdiagnosis range from 1% to 10%. Substantially higher estimates of overdiagnosis reported in the literature are due to the lack of adjustment for breast cancer risk and/or lead time.

1 November 2015 in European Urology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CBCarlotta Buzzoni
Carlotta Buzzoni
AAAnssi Auvinen
Anssi Auvinen
Monique RoobolMonique Roobol
Monique Roobol
SCSigrid Carlsson
Sigrid Carlsson
SMSue M. Moss
Sue M. Moss
MZMarco Zappa
Marco Zappa

1 July 2014 in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EPEugenio Paci
Eugenio Paci
MBMireille Broeders
Mireille Broeders
SHSolveig Hofvind
Solveig Hofvind
DPDonella Puliti
Donella Puliti
SDStephen William Duffy
Stephen William Duffy
TGthe EUROSCREEN Working Group
the EUROSCREEN Working Group
A recent comprehensive review has been carried out to quantify the benefits and harms of the European population-based mammographic screening programs. Five literature reviews were conducted on the basis of the observational published studies evaluating breast cancer mortality reduction, breast cancer overdiagnosis, and false-positive results. On the basis of the studies reviewed, the authors present a first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet. For every 1,000 women screened biennially from ages 50 to 51 years until ages 68 to 69 years and followed up until age 79 years, an estimated seven to nine breast cancer deaths are avoided, four cases are overdiagnosed, 170 women have at least one recall followed by noninvasive assessment with a negative result, and 30 women have at least one recall followed by invasive procedures yielding a negative result. The chance of a breast cancer death being avoided by population-based mammography screening of appropriate quality is more than that of overdiagnosis by screening. These outcomes should be communicated to women offered service screening in Europe. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(7); 1159–63. ©2014 AACR.

5 December 2006 in Breast Cancer Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
EPEugenio Paci
Eugenio Paci
GMGuido Miccinesi
Guido Miccinesi
DPDonella Puliti
Donella Puliti
PBPaola Baldazzi
Paola Baldazzi
VLVincenzo De Lisi
Vincenzo De Lisi
MZManuel Zorzi
Manuel Zorzi
Introduction: Excess of incidence rates is the expected consequence of service screening. The aim of this paper is to estimate the quota attributable to overdiagnosis in the breast cancer screening programmes in Northern and Central Italy. Methods: All patients with breast cancer diagnosed between 50 and 74 years who were resident in screening areas in the six years before and five years after the start of the screening programme were included. We calculated a corrected-for-lead-time number of observed cases for each calendar year. The number of observed incident cases was reduced by the number of screen-detected cases in that year and incremented by the estimated number of screen-detected cases that would have arisen clinically in that year. Results: In total we included 13,519 and 13,999 breast cancer cases diagnosed in the pre-screening and screening years, respectively. In total, the excess ratio of observed to predicted in situ and invasive cases was 36.2%. After correction for lead time the excess ratio was 4.6% (95% confidence interval 2 to 7%) and for invasive cases only it was 3.2% (95% confidence interval 1 to 6%). Conclusion: The remaining excess of cancers after individual correction for lead time was lower than 5%.

29 July 2008 in British Journal of Cancer
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TGthe IMPACT Working Group
the IMPACT Working Group
DPDonella Puliti
Donella Puliti
GMG Miccinesi
G Miccinesi
NCN Collina
N Collina
VLV De Lisi
V De Lisi
EPE Paci
E Paci
The aim of this study was the evaluation of the impact of service screening programmes on breast cancer mortality in five regions of Italy. We conducted a matched case–control study with four controls for each case. Cases were defined as breast cancer deaths occurred not later than 31 December 2002. Controls were sampled from the local municipality list and matched by date of birth. Screening histories were assessed by the local, computerised, screening database and subjects were classified as either invited or not-yet-invited and as either screened or unscreened. There were a total of 1750 breast cancer deaths within the 50 to 74-year-old breast cancer cases and a total of 7000 controls. The logistic conditional estimate of the cumulative odds ratios comparing invited with not-yet-invited women was 0.75 (95% CI: 0.62–0.92). Restricting the analyses to invited women, the odds ratio of screened to never-respondent women corrected for self-selection bias was 0.55 (95% CI: 0.36–0.85). The introduction of breast cancer screening programmes in Italy is associated with a reduction in breast cancer mortality attributable to the additional impact of service screening over and above the background access to mammography.