Literature DB >> 14572153

Mammography surveillance following breast cancer.

Berta M Geller1, Karla Kerlikowske, Patricia A Carney, Linn A Abraham, Bonnie C Yankaskas, Stephen H Taplin, Rachel Ballard-Barbash, Mark B Dignan, Robert Rosenberg, Nicole Urban, William E Barlow.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To describe when women diagnosed with breast cancer return for their first mammography, and to identify factors predictive of women returning for mammographic surveillance.
METHODS: Women who underwent mammography at facilities participating in the National Cancer Institute's Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) during 1996 and who were subsequently diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer were included in this study. Data from seven mammography registries were linked to population-based cancer and pathology registries. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to depict the number of months from the breast cancer diagnosis to the first mammogram within the defined follow-up period. Demographic, disease and treatment variables were included in univariate and multivariate analyses to identify factors predictive of women returning for mammography.
RESULTS: Of the 2503 women diagnosed with breast cancer, 78.1% returned for mammography examination between 7 and 30 months following the diagnosis. Mammography facilities indicated that 66.8% of mammography examinations were classified as screening. Multivariate analyses found that women were most likely to undergo surveillance mammography if they were diagnosed at ages 60-69 with Stage 0, I or II breast cancer and had received radiation therapy in addition to surgery.
CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of women return for mammographic surveillance following breast cancer, some important subgroups of women at higher risk for recurrence are less likely to return. Research is needed to determine why some women are not undergoing mammography surveillance after a breast cancer diagnosis and whether surveillance increases the chance of detecting tumors with a good prognosis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14572153     DOI: 10.1023/A:1025794629878

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  23 in total

1.  Population-based longitudinal study of follow-up care for breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Eva Grunfeld; David C Hodgson; M Elisabeth Del Giudice; Rahim Moineddin
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.840

2.  Evaluation of Therapy Management and Patient Compliance in Postmenopausal Patients with Hormone Receptor-positive Breast Cancer Receiving Letrozole Treatment: The EvaluateTM Study.

Authors:  P A Fasching; T Fehm; S Kellner; J de Waal; M Rezai; B Baier; G Baake; H-C Kolberg; M Guggenberger; M Warm; N Harbeck; R Würstlein; J-U Deuker; P Dall; B Richter; G Wachsmann; C Brucker; J W Siebers; N Fersis; T Kuhn; C Wolf; H-W Vollert; G-P Breitbach; W Janni; R Landthaler; A Kohls; D Rezek; T Noesslet; G Fischer; S Henschen; T Praetz; V Heyl; T Kühn; T Krauß; C Thomssen; S Kümmel; A Hohn; H Tesch; C Mundhenke; A Hein; C Rauh; C M Bayer; A Jacob; K Schmidt; E Belleville; P Hadji; D Wallwiener; E-M Grischke; M W Beckmann; S Y Brucker
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.915

3.  Automated annotation and classification of BI-RADS assessment from radiology reports.

Authors:  Sergio M Castro; Eugene Tseytlin; Olga Medvedeva; Kevin Mitchell; Shyam Visweswaran; Tanja Bekhuis; Rebecca S Jacobson
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 6.317

4.  Factors associated with long-term adherence to annual surveillance mammography among breast cancer survivors.

Authors:  Heidi S Wirtz; Denise M Boudreau; Julie R Gralow; William E Barlow; Shelly Gray; Erin J A Bowles; Diana S M Buist
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Interdisciplinary GoR level III Guidelines for the Diagnosis, Therapy and Follow-up Care of Breast Cancer: Short version - AWMF Registry No.: 032-045OL AWMF-Register-Nummer: 032-045OL - Kurzversion 3.0, Juli 2012.

Authors:  R Kreienberg; U-S Albert; M Follmann; I B Kopp; T Kühn; A Wöckel
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.915

6.  Adherence to surveillance care guidelines after breast and colorectal cancer treatment with curative intent.

Authors:  Ramzi G Salloum; Mark C Hornbrook; Paul A Fishman; Debra P Ritzwoller; Maureen C O'Keeffe Rossetti; Jennifer Elston Lafata
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Mammography capacity and appointment wait times: barriers to breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Elena B Elkin; Jacqueline G Snow; Nicole M Leoce; Coral L Atoria; Deborah Schrag
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2011-10-29       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Validation of self-reported post-treatment mammography surveillance among breast cancer survivors by electronic medical record extraction method.

Authors:  Jasmin A Tiro; Joanne M Sanders; L Aubree Shay; Caitlin C Murphy; Heidi A Hamann; L Kay Bartholomew; Lara S Savas; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Evidence for Detection Bias by Medication Use in a Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Heidi S Wirtz; Gregory S Calip; Diana S M Buist; Julie R Gralow; William E Barlow; Shelly Gray; Denise M Boudreau
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-04-15       Impact factor: 4.897

10.  Are cancer registries a viable tool for cancer survivor outreach? A feasibility study.

Authors:  Melissa Y Carpentier; Jasmin A Tiro; Lara S Savas; L Kay Bartholomew; Trisha V Melhado; Sharon P Coan; Keith E Argenbright; Sally W Vernon
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 4.442

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.