Literature DB >> 11126165

Ten years of breast screening in the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia, 1988-97.

I A Olivotto1, L Kan, Y d'Yachkova, L J Burhenne, M Hayes, T G Hislop, A J Worth, V E Basco, S King.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 10 years outcomes of the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia (SMPBC) and determine if breast screening targets were being achieved among women aged 40-80+ years.
SETTING: Organised breast screening programme in British Columbia, Canada.
METHODS: Rates of participation, abnormal referral, cancer detection, and interval cancer were calculated for asymptomatic women receiving an SMPBC mammography from 1988-97.
RESULTS: 895,849 screening mammographies were provided to 335,433 women. 51.3% of women were age 50-69 years. Abnormalities were identified on 57,454 screens (6.4%) from which 3304 cancers were detected. Abnormal call rates were higher on first (9.8%), compared with subsequent screens (4.4%) and declined with age: 7.7% at age < 40 to 5.4% for age 70-79 years. Cancer detection rates were higher on first (5.0 per 1000) compared with subsequent screens (2.8 per 1000) and increased smoothly with age from 1.4 to 8.2 per 1000 from age < 40 to age 80 years and older. Twenty per cent of cancers were non-invasive. The median size of invasive cancers was 14 mm and 81% had no axillary lymph node metastases. The 12 month interval cancer rate was 0.6 per 1000 and did not vary significantly with age or screening history. The prevalence to expected incidence ratio was 3.1 for women age 50-79 years.
CONCLUSION: Across a broad range of ages, surrogate indices of screening mammography success have been achieved in a population based, North American, organised breast cancer screening programme.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11126165     DOI: 10.1136/jms.7.3.152

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Screen        ISSN: 0969-1413            Impact factor:   2.136


  8 in total

1.  Improving the time to diagnosis after an abnormal screening mammogram.

Authors:  I A Olivotto; M J Borugian; L Kan; S R Harris; E J Rousseau; S E Thorne; J A Vestrup; C J Wright; A J Coldman; T G Hislop
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct

Review 2.  Mode of detection and secular time for ductal carcinoma in situ.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2010

3.  Adherence to cancer screening guidelines across Canadian provinces: an observational study.

Authors:  Erin C Strumpf; Zhijin Chai; Srikanth Kadiyala
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2010-06-18       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  The impact of digital mammography on screening a young cohort of women for breast cancer in an urban specialist breast unit.

Authors:  Nicholas M Perry; N Patani; S E Milner; K Pinker; K Mokbel; P C Allgood; S W Duffy
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Waiting times from abnormal breast screen to diagnosis in 7 Canadian provinces.

Authors:  I A Olivotto; C Bancej; V Goel; J Snider; R G McAuley; B Irvine; L Kan; D Mirsky; M J Sabine; R McGilly; J S Caines
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-08-07       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Facilitated "fast track" referral reduces time from abnormal screening mammogram to diagnosis.

Authors:  Marilyn J Borugian; Lisa Kan; Christina C Y Chu; Kathy Ceballos; Karen A Gelmon; Paula B Gordon; Barbara Poole; Scott Tyldesley; Ivo A Olivotto
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2008 Jul-Aug

7.  Comparison of 1- and 2-year screening intervals for women undergoing screening mammography.

Authors:  E S Wai; Y D'yachkova; I A Olivotto; S Tyldesley; N Phillips; L J Warren; A J Coldman
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-03-14       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Breast cancer survival and prognosis by screening history.

Authors:  A J Coldman; N Phillips
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.