Literature DB >> 15333271

Surgical intervention in screen-detected patients versus symptomatic patients with breast cancer.

M F Dillon1, A D K Hill, C M Quinn, A O'Doherty, J Crown, F J Fleming, E W McDermott, N O'Higgins.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The impact of population-based screening for breast cancer on the rate of breast-conserving surgery has not been established. We sought to evaluate whether surgical intervention in patients with screen-detected breast cancer differed from those with clinically detected tumours. SETTINGS: St Vincent's University Hospital and the BreastCheck Merrion Unit, part of the Irish National Breast Screening Programme, were the setting for the study.
METHODS: A total of 902 patients referred for surgery to St Vincent's University Hospital over a four-year period (2000-2003) were studied. Patients with breast cancers detected during the prevalent round of screening (n=325) were compared with patients presenting with symptomatic disease (n=577). The operative procedure, nature of axillary surgery and histopathological findings were recorded in each case.
RESULTS: There was an increase in breast-conserving therapy in the screened population compared with symptomatic cases (68% screened versus 53% symptomatic; p<0.0001), with a corresponding reduction in axillary clearance rates (65% screened versus 81% symptomatic; p<0.0001). Nodal positivity was similar following correction for size in all tumours >1 cm, regardless of method of detection. Sentinel node biopsy was successfully undertaken in 39% of tumours <2 cm (T1 tumours) [corrected] in the screening population.
CONCLUSIONS: The screened population was statistically more likely to have breast-conserving therapy than the symptomatic group. Sentinel node biopsy has evolved into an acceptable alternative to axillary clearance in T1 cancers, particularly in screen-detected cases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15333271     DOI: 10.1258/0969141041732238

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


  7 in total

Review 1.  Geographic Access to Mammography and Its Relationship to Breast Cancer Screening and Stage at Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jenna A Khan-Gates; Jennifer L Ersek; Jan M Eberth; Swann A Adams; Sandi L Pruitt
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-07-26

2.  Impact of Detection Mode in a Large Cohort of Women Taking Part in a Breast Screening Program.

Authors:  Marilina García; Maximino Redondo; Irene Zarcos; Javier Louro; Francisco Rivas-Ruiz; Teresa Téllez; Diego Pérez; Francisco Medina Cano; Kenza Machan; Laia Domingo; Maria Del Mar Vernet; Maria Padilla-Ruiz; Xavier Castells; Maria Sala
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2022-04-01

3.  Mammography Screening - as of 2013.

Authors:  S Heywang-Koebrunner; K Bock; W Heindel; G Hecht; L Regitz-Jedermann; A Hacker; V Kaeaeb-Sanyal
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.915

4.  Impact of familial risk and mammography screening on prognostic indicators of breast disease among women from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Authors:  Meghan J Walker; Lucia Mirea; Kristine Cooper; Mitra Nabavi; Gord Glendon; Irene L Andrulis; Julia A Knight; Frances P O'Malley; Anna M Chiarelli
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.375

5.  Short- and Long-Term (10-year) Results of an Organized, Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program: Comparative, Observational Study from Hungary.

Authors:  Dezső Tóth; Zsolt Varga; Judit Tóth; Péter Árkosy; Éva Sebő
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  Detection methods predict differences in biology and survival in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Maximino Redondo; Rafael Funez; Francisco Medina-Cano; Isabel Rodrigo; Mercedes Acebal; Teresa Tellez; M Jose Roldan; M Luisa Hortas; Ana Bellinvia; Teresa Pereda; Laia Domingo; María Morales-Suarez Varela; Maria Sala; Antonio Rueda
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2012-12-17       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Clinical and prognostic factors associated with diagnostic wait times by breast cancer detection method.

Authors:  Amalia Plotogea; Anna M Chiarelli; Lucia Mirea; Maegan V Prummel; Nelson Chong; Rene S Shumak; Frances P O'Malley; Claire Mb Holloway
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-03-06
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.