Literature DB >> 10945496

Pathology characteristics that optimize outcome prediction of a breast screening trial.

T J Anderson1, F E Alexander, J Lamb, A Smith, A P Forrest.   

Abstract

The ability of pathology characteristics to predict outcome was tested with the 1029 cancers accumulated in the Edinburgh Randomized Trial of breast screening after 14 years follow-up. The majority (55.7%) were in the screening arm, which also had more operable cases (81.3% vs 62.2%); the reduction in the proportion of inoperable breast cancers in a UK female population invited to mammographic screening is a notable effect of the trial. In the 691 operable invasive cases the size, histological type, grade, node status and node number group individually showed highly significant (P<0.001) association with survival. In multivariate analysis the Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) derived from these features showed highly significant association with survival (P<0.001). However, when first adjusted for NPI, combined addition of pathological size in 6 categories and histological type as special or not had an independent association with survival that was statistically firmly based (P<0.001). For operable breast cancer the gains are in smaller sizes, better histological features, and higher proportion node negative. The weighting factors applied to pathology indicators of survival in the NPI are not optimal for a population included in a trial of screening. In particular, a linear trend of the index with pathological size is not appropriate. Inclusion of histological type as special or not improves the index further.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10945496      PMCID: PMC2374653          DOI: 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1286

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  26 in total

1.  The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening?

Authors:  T J Anderson; F E Alexander; P M Forrest
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2000-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  The efficacy of lower axillary sampling in obtaining lymph node status in breast cancer: a controlled randomized trial.

Authors:  R J Steele; A P Forrest; T Gibson; H J Stewart; U Chetty
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  A novel method for prediction of long-term outcome of women with T1a, T1b, and 10-14 mm invasive breast cancers: a prospective study.

Authors:  L Tabár; H H Chen; S W Duffy; M F Yen; C F Chiang; P B Dean; R A Smith
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-02-05       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Comparative pathology of prevalent and incident cancers detected by breast screening. Edinburgh Breast Screening Project.

Authors:  T J Anderson; J Lamb; F Alexander; W Lutz; U Chetty; A P Forrest; A Kirkpatrick; B Muir; M M Roberts; A Huggins
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-03-08       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Long-term survivors after breast cancer.

Authors:  J M Dixon; D L Page; T J Anderson; D Lee; R A Elton; H J Stewart; A P Forrest
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  Analysis of interval breast carcinomas in a randomized screening trial in Stockholm.

Authors:  J Frisell; G Eklund; L Hellström; A Somell
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  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.

Authors:  L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  The Edinburgh randomised trial of screening for breast cancer: description of method.

Authors:  M M Roberts; F E Alexander; T J Anderson; A P Forrest; W Hepburn; A Huggins; A E Kirkpatrick; J Lamb; W Lutz; B B Muir
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Confirmation of a prognostic index in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  J H Todd; C Dowle; M R Williams; C W Elston; I O Ellis; C P Hinton; R W Blamey; J L Haybittle
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  A prognostic index in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  J L Haybittle; R W Blamey; C W Elston; J Johnson; P J Doyle; F C Campbell; R I Nicholson; K Griffiths
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  14 in total

1.  Breast cancer prognostication in the 21st century and the Nottingham prognostic index.

Authors:  T J Anderson
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 2.  Practical implications of gene-expression-based assays for breast oncologists.

Authors:  Aleix Prat; Matthew J Ellis; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Measures of benefit for breast screening from the pathology database for Scotland, 1991-2001.

Authors:  T J Anderson; C Davis; F E Alexander; H M Dobson
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 4.  Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade.

Authors:  Emad A Rakha; Jorge S Reis-Filho; Frederick Baehner; David J Dabbs; Thomas Decker; Vincenzo Eusebi; Stephen B Fox; Shu Ichihara; Jocelyne Jacquemier; Sunil R Lakhani; José Palacios; Andrea L Richardson; Stuart J Schnitt; Fernando C Schmitt; Puay-Hoon Tan; Gary M Tse; Sunil Badve; Ian O Ellis
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 6.466

5.  Randomised controlled trial of mammographic screening in women from age 40: predicted mortality based on surrogate outcome measures.

Authors:  S Moss; M Waller; T J Anderson; H Cuckle
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-03-14       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Molecular profiles of screen detected vs. symptomatic breast cancer and their impact on survival: results from a clinical series.

Authors:  Anna Crispo; Maddalena Barba; Giuseppe D'Aiuto; Michelino De Laurentiis; Maria Grimaldi; Massimo Rinaldo; Giuseppina Caolo; Massimiliano D'Aiuto; Immacolata Capasso; Emanuela Esposito; Alfonso Amore; Maurizio Di Bonito; Gerardo Botti; Maurizio Montella
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 4.430

Review 7.  Should women under 50 be screened for breast cancer?

Authors:  S Moss
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-08-02       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Predicting aggressive outcome in T1N0M0 breast cancer.

Authors:  P Kronqvist; T Kuopio; M Nykänen; H Helenius; J Anttinen; P Klemi
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-07-19       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Prognostic and therapeutic significance of ribonucleotide reductase small subunit M2 in estrogen-negative breast cancers.

Authors:  Hang Zhang; Xiyong Liu; Charles D Warden; Yasheng Huang; Sofia Loera; Lijun Xue; Suzhan Zhang; Peiguo Chu; Shu Zheng; Yun Yen
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2014-09-11       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  The pattern of prognostic and risk indicators among women with breast cancer undergoing modified radical mastectomy in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Authors:  Amos R Mwakigonja; Happiness Rabiel; Naboth A Mbembati; Leonard E K Lema
Journal:  Infect Agent Cancer       Date:  2016-06-30       Impact factor: 2.965

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.