Scientific publications:

Trocchi, P.; Kuss, O.; Kääb-Sanyal, V.; Heidinger, O.; Stang, A. Trends in Surgical Treatment for Breast Cancer in Germany after the Implementation of the Mammography Screening Program. Eur J Epidemiol 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-019-00570-x.

Prange, A.; Bokhof, B.; Polzer, P.; Tio, J.; Radke, I.; Heidinger, O.; Heindel, W.; Weigel, S. Higher Detection Rates of Biologically Aggressive Breast Cancers in Mammography Screening than in the Biennial Interval. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0657-3970.

Bokhof, B.; Khil, L.; Urbschat, I.; Gnas, L.; Hecht, G.; Heidinger, O.; Heindel, W.; Kieschke, J.; Weigel, S.; Hense, H.-W. Time trend in programme sensitivity within the German mammography screening programme in North Rhine-Westphalia and Lower Saxony]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 2018, 61 (12), 1517–1527.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-018-2843-7.

Weigel, S.; Gerss, J.; Hense, H.-W.; Krischke, M.; Sommer, A.; Czwoydzinski, J.; Lenzen, H.; Kerschke, L.; Spieker, K.; Dickmaenken, S.; Baier, S.; Urban, M.; Hecht, G.; Heidinger, O.; Kieschke, J.; Heindel, W. Digital Breast Tomosynthesis plus Synthesised Images versus Standard Full-Field Digital Mammography in Population-Based Screening (TOSYMA): Protocol of a Randomised Controlled Trial. BMJopen 2018, 8 (5), e020475.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020475.

Weigel, S.; Khil, L.; Hense, H.-W.; Decker, T.; Wellmann, J.; Heidrich, J.; Sommer, A.; Heidinger, O.; Heindel, W. Detection Rates of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ with Biennial Digital Mammography Screening: Radiologic Findings Support Pathologic Model of Tumor Progression. Radiology 2017, 286 (2), 424–432.
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170673.

Weigel, S.; Hense, H. W.; Heidrich, J.; Berkemeyer, S.; Heindel, W.; Heidinger, O. Digital Mammography Screening: Does Age Influence the Detection Rates of Low-, Intermediate-, and High-Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ? Radiology 2016, 278 (3), 707–713.
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2015150322.

Malek, D.; Kääb-Sanyal, V. Implementation of the German Mammography Screening Program (German MSP) and First Results for Initial Examinations, 2005-2009. Breast Care 2016, 11 (3), 183–187.
https://doi.org/10.1159/000446359.

Simbrich, A.; Wellmann, I.; Heidrich, J.; Heidinger, O.; Hense, H.-W. Trends in Advanced Breast Cancer Incidence Rates after Implementation of a Mammography Screening Program in a German Population. Cancer Epidemiology 2016, 44, 44–51.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2016.07.006.

Weigel, S.; Heindel, W.; Heidrich, J.; Hense, H.-W.; Heidinger, O. Digital Mammography Screening: Sensitivity of the Programme Dependent on Breast Density. Eur Radiol 2016, 27 (7), 2744–2751.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-016-4636-4.

Weigel, S.; Heindel, W.; Heidrich, J.; Heidinger, O.; Hense, H. Reduction of Advanced Breast Cancer Stages at Subsequent Participation in Mammography Screening. RöFö 2015, 188 (01), 33–37.
https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-107835.

Weigel, S.; Heindel, W.; Heidinger, O.; Berkemeyer, S.; Hense, H. W. Digital Mammography Screening: Association between Detection Rate and Nuclear Grade of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ. Radiology 2014, 271 (1), 38–44.
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.13131498.

Weigel, S., Berkemeyer, S., Girnus, R., Sommer, A., Lenzen, H., Heindel, W.: Digital Mammography Screening with Photon-Counting Technique: Can a High Diagnostic Performance Be Realized at Low Mean Glandular Dose? Radiology 271, no. 2 2014: 345–355.
http://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.13131181.

Sommer, A., Schopphoven,S., Land,I., Blaser,D., Sobczak, T.: Guideline for Determining the Mean Glandular Dose According to DIN 6868-162 and Threshold Contrast Visibility According to the Quality Assurance Guideline for Digital Mammography Systems. RöFo – Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden Verfahren 186, no. 05 (February 20, 2014: 474–481.
http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0033-1356284.

Entz, K., Sommer,A., Heindel,W., Lenzen,H.: Relationship between Detector Size and the Need for Extra Images and Their Effect on Radiation Exposure in Digital Mammography Screening. RöFo – Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden Verfahren 186, no. 09 2014: 868–875.
http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0033-1356429.

Stang, A., Kääb-Sanyal, V., Hense, H., Becker, N., Kuss, O.: Effect of mammography screening on surgical treatment for breast cancer: a nationwide analysis of hospitalization rates in Germany 2005–2009. Eur J Epidemiol 28, 689–696 2013.
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10654-013-9816-9.

Weigel, S., Biesheuvel, C., Berkemeyer, S., Kugel, H., Heindel, W.: Digital mammography screening: how many breast cancers are additionally detected by bilateral ultrasound examination during assessment?. Eur Radiol 23, 684–691 2013.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-012-2664-2.

Hense, HW., Batzler, WU., Heidinger, O.: Implications of mammography screening on breast cancer epidemiology in the population. 2012 Eur J Epidemiol 2012; 27: S1-S197. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-012-9722-6
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10654-012-9722-6.

Heidinger, O., Batzler, WU., Krieg, V., Weigel, S., Biesheuvel, C., Heindel, W., Hense, HW.: The incidence of interval cancers in the German mammography screening program: results from the population-based cancer registry in North Rhine-Westphalia. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2012;109(46):781-787.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3514772.

Biesheuvel, C., Weigel, S., Heindel, W.: Mammography Screening: Evidence, History and Current Practice in Germany and Other European Countries. Breast Care 2011;6:104-109.
https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/327493.

Weigel, S., Decker, T., Korsching, E., Hungermann, D., Böcker, W., Heindel, W.: Calcifications in Digital Mammographic Screening: Improvement of Early Detection of Invasive Breast Cancers? Radiology 255, no. 3 2010: 738–45.
https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.10091173.

Hungermann, D., Weigel, S., Korsching, E., Heindel, W., Böcker, W., Decker, T.: Diagnostics of microcalcifications from minimally invasive biopsies in mammography screening. Pathologe 30, 31–35 2009.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00292-008-1100-5.

Weigel S., Batzler WU., Decker T., Hense HW., Heindel W. First epidemiological analysis of breast cancer incidence and tumor characteristics after implementation of population-based digital mammography screening. Rofo. 2009 ;181(12):1144-1150.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19859859/.

 

Reports (in German only):

Jahresbericht Evaluation 2018 Deutsches Mammographie-Screening-Programm.
Kooperationsgemeinschaft Mammographie, Berlin, Oktober 2020

Jahresbericht Qualitätssicherung 2018. Ergebnisse des Deutschen Mammographie-Screening-Programms. Kooperationsgemeinschaft Mammographie, Berlin, Oktober 2020

Evaluationsbericht 2005–2012 – Ergebnis- und Prozessqualität im deutschen Mammographie-Screening- Programm. Kooperationsgemeinschaft Mammographie, Berlin, August 2015

Programmbeschreibung. Das Mammographie-Screening-Programm in Deutschland. Kooperationsgemeinschaft Mammographie, Berlin, Februar 2017