Literature DB >> 11387916

Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer: a practice guideline.

R E Myers1, M Johnston, K Pritchard, M Levine, T Oliver.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer develops in over 7000 women each year in Ontario. These patients will all undergo some staging work-up at diagnosis. The Breast Cancer Disease Site Group of the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guidelines Initiative reviewed the evidence and indications for routine bone scanning, liver ultrasonography and chest radiography in asymptomatic women who have undergone surgery for breast cancer.
METHODS: A systematic review of the published literature was combined with a consensus interpretation of the evidence in the context of conventional practice.
RESULTS: There were 11 studies of bone scanning reported between 1972 and 1980, involving a total of 1307 women; bone scans detected skeletal metastases in 6.8% of those with stage I breast cancer, 8.8% with stage II and 24.5% with stage III. A total of 5407 women participated in 9 studies of bone scanning reported between 1985 and 1995; in these studies, bone scans detected skeletal metastases in only 0.5% of women with stage I disease, 2.4% with stage II and 8.3% with stage III. Among 1625 women in 4 studies of liver ultrasonography reported between 1988 and 1993, hepatic metastases were detected in 0% of patients with stage I disease, 0.4% with stage II and 2.0% with stage III. Among 3884 patients in 2 studies of chest radiography published in 1988 and 1991, lung metastases were detected in 0.1% of those with stage I, 0.2% with stage II and 1.7% with stage III. False-positive rates ranged from 10% to 22% for bone scanning, 33% to 66% for liver ultrasonography and 0% to 23% for chest radiography. The false-negative rate for bone scanning was about 10%. RECOMMENDATIONS: The following recommendations apply to women with newly diagnosed breast cancer who have undergone surgical resection and who have no symptoms, physical signs or biochemical evidence of metastases. Routine bone scanning, liver ultrasonography and chest radiography are not indicated before surgery. In women with intraductal and pathological stage I tumours, routine bone scanning, liver ultrasonography and chest radiography are not indicated as part of baseline staging. In women who have pathological stage II tumours, a postoperative bone scan is recommended as part of baseline staging. Routine liver ultrasonography and chest radiography are not indicated in this group but could be considered for patients with 4 or more positive lymph nodes. In women with pathological stage III tumours, bone scanning, liver ultrasonography and chest radiography are recommended postoperatively as part of baseline staging. In women for whom treatment options are restricted to tamoxifen or hormone therapy, or for whom no further treatment is indicated because of age or other factors, routine bone scanning, liver ultrasonography and chest radiography are not indicated as part of baseline staging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11387916      PMCID: PMC81070     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  CMAJ        ISSN: 0820-3946            Impact factor:   8.262


  31 in total

1.  Cytokeratin-positive cells in the bone marrow and survival of patients with stage I, II, or III breast cancer.

Authors:  S Braun; K Pantel; P Müller; W Janni; F Hepp; C R Kentenich; S Gastroph; A Wischnik; T Dimpfl; G Kindermann; G Riethmüller; G Schlimok
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-02-24       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Follow-up after treatment for breast cancer. The Steering Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1998-02-10       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  The detection of skeletal metastases from mammary cancer by gamma camera scintigraphy.

Authors:  C S Galasko
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1969-10       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Value of preoperative bone and liver scans and alkaline phosphatase in the evaluation of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  H S Brar; J F Sisley; R H Johnson
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 5.  Bone scintigraphy screening in stage I-II breast cancer: is it cost-effective?

Authors:  K A Wikenheiser; E B Silberstein
Journal:  Cleve Clin J Med       Date:  1996 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.321

6.  The practice guidelines development cycle: a conceptual tool for practice guidelines development and implementation.

Authors:  G P Browman; M N Levine; E A Mohide; R S Hayward; K I Pritchard; A Gafni; A Laupacis
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  An evaluation of radionuclide bone scanning and liver ultrasonography for staging breast cancer.

Authors:  M R Cox; R Gilliland; G W Odling-Smee; R A Spence
Journal:  Aust N Z J Surg       Date:  1992-07

8.  Routine bone scanning in patients with T1 and T2 breast cancer: a waste of money.

Authors:  K A Yeh; L Fortunato; J A Ridge; J P Hoffman; B L Eisenberg; E R Sigurdson
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  1995-07       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Cost efficiency of bone scans in breast cancer.

Authors:  H Kennedy; N Kennedy; M Barclay; M Horobin
Journal:  Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol)       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 4.126

10.  Outcome of extensive evaluation before adjuvant therapy in women with breast cancer and 10 or more positive axillary lymph nodes.

Authors:  M Crump; P E Goss; M Prince; C Girouard
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  27 in total

1.  Baseline staging tests for breast cancer.

Authors:  Andrew L Cooke
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2002-02-19       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  J Watine
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-11-13       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  Initial staging impact of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in locally advanced breast cancer.

Authors:  Naoki Niikura; Jun Liu; Colleen M Costelloe; Shana L Palla; John E Madewell; Naoki Hayashi; Tse-Kuan Yu; Yutaka Tokuda; Richard L Theriault; Gabriel N Hortobagyi; Naoto T Ueno
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2011-05-31

4.  Bone scintigraphy: procedure guidelines for tumour imaging.

Authors:  Emilio Bombardieri; Cumali Aktolun; Richard P Baum; Angelika Bishof-Delaloye; John Buscombe; Jean François Chatal; Lorenzo Maffioli; Roy Moncayo; Luc Morteímans; Sven N Reske
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Significance of a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in staging for distant metastasis in breast cancer: are current guidelines relevant?

Authors:  Tje Hubbard; C Ives
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2020-04-24       Impact factor: 1.891

6.  Use of imaging for staging of early-stage breast cancer in two integrated health care systems: adherence with a choosing wisely recommendation.

Authors:  Erin E Hahn; Tania Tang; Janet S Lee; Corrine Munoz-Plaza; Joyce O Adesina; Ernest Shen; Braden Rowley; Jared L Maeda; David M Mosen; John C Ruckdeschel; Michael K Gould
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 3.840

7.  Investigations for patients with early-stage breast cancer: oversetting the stage.

Authors:  Daniel Rayson; Geoff Porter
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2015-06-22       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Unwarranted imaging for distant metastases in patients with newly diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ and stage I and II breast cancer

Authors:  Sasha Lupichuk; Derek Tilley; Brae Surgeoner; Karen King; Anil Abraham Joy
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 2.089

Review 9.  CNS complications of breast cancer: current and emerging treatment options.

Authors:  Evert C A Kaal; Charles J Vecht
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.749

10.  Is the assessment of the central skeleton sufficient for osseous staging in breast cancer patients? A retrospective approach using bone scans.

Authors:  Julia Krammer; Dorothee Engel; Andreas Schnitzer; Clemens G Kaiser; Dietmar J Dinter; Joachim Brade; Stefan O Schoenberg; Klaus Wasser
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.