Literature DB >> 17626708

Service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden: effects on breast cancer mortality - an update.

Håkan Jonsson1, Pál Bordás, Hans Wallin, Lennarth Nyström, Per Lenner.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study the effectiveness of service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden.
SETTING: Two counties which invited women aged 40-74 years to service screening with mammography were compared with two counties where service screening started 5-7 years later. There were 109,000 and 77,000 women in the study and control counties, respectively.
METHODS: Cohorts in the study group were defined to include only breast cancer cases diagnosed after their first invitation to screening. Two outcome measures for breast cancer mortality were used; excess mortality and underlying cause of death (UCD). Detection mode was used to estimate the efficacy of screening for those women who actually attended screening. The cohorts were followed for 11 years.
RESULTS: The relative rate (RR) of breast cancer death as excess mortality and UCD for women aged 40-74 years invited to screening, compared with women not yet invited, was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.87) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.62-0.88), respectively. The largest effect was seen in women aged 40-49 years (RR = 0.64 and RR = 0.62 for excess mortality and UCD, respectively). RR in age 40-74 years for women actually screened was 0.65 (95% CI 0.51-0.84) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.86) for excess mortality and UCD, respectively. The number of women needed to screen to save one life was 912 after 11 years of follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms previous findings in the earlier follow-up and indicates a long-term reduction of breast cancer mortality by 26-30%. The efficacy among those who actually attended screening was about 5% larger.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17626708     DOI: 10.1258/096914107781261918

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


  19 in total

1.  An examination of sexual orientation group patterns in mammographic and colorectal screening in a cohort of U.S. women.

Authors:  S Bryn Austin; Mathew J Pazaris; Lauren P Nichols; Deborah Bowen; Esther K Wei; Donna Spiegelman
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  Breast cancer screening panels continue to confuse the facts and inject their own biases.

Authors:  D B Kopans
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  More misinformation on breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2017-02

Review 4.  The wisdom trial is based on faulty reasoning and has major design and execution problems.

Authors:  Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Breast cancer screening: evidence of benefit depends on the method used.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Mathieu Boniol
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 8.775

6.  Advantages and Disadvantages of Mammography Screening.

Authors:  Sylvia H Heywang-Köbrunner; Astrid Hacker; Stefan Sedlacek
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 2.860

7.  Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society.

Authors:  Kevin C Oeffinger; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ruth Etzioni; Abbe Herzig; James S Michaelson; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Louise C Walter; Timothy R Church; Christopher R Flowers; Samuel J LaMonte; Andrew M D Wolf; Carol DeSantis; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Kimberly Andrews; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Debbie Saslow; Robert A Smith; Otis W Brawley; Richard Wender
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Prostate cancer mortality in areas with high and low prostate cancer incidence.

Authors:  Pär Stattin; Sigrid Carlsson; Benny Holmström; Andrew Vickers; Jonas Hugosson; Hans Lilja; Håkan Jonsson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Different types of implants for reconstructive breast surgery.

Authors:  Nicola Rocco; Corrado Rispoli; Lorenzo Moja; Bruno Amato; Loredana Iannone; Serena Testa; Andrea Spano; Giuseppe Catanuto; Antonello Accurso; Maurizio B Nava
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-05-16

10.  Do Asian breast cancer patients have poorer survival than their western counterparts? A comparison between Singapore and Stockholm.

Authors:  Benita Kiat Tee Tan; Gek Hsiang Lim; Kamila Czene; Per Hall; Kee Seng Chia
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.