Literature DB >> 1764377

Breast screening, prognostic factors and survival--results from the Swedish two county study.

S W Duffy1, L Tabar, G Fagerberg, A Gad, O Gröntoft, M C South, N E Day.   

Abstract

The results of the Swedish two-county study are analysed with respect to tumour size, nodal status and malignancy grade, and the relationship of these prognostic factors to screening and to survival. It is shown that these factors can account for much of the differences in survival between incidence screen detected, interval and control group cancers but to a lesser extent for cancers detected at the prevalence screen where length bias is greatest. Furthermore, examination of the relationships among the prognostic factors and mode of detection indicates that malignancy grade, as a measure of inherent malignant capacity, evolves as a tumour grows. The proportion of cancers with poor malignancy grade is several fold lower for cancers of diameter less than 15 cm than for cancers greater than 30 cm, independent of the length bias of screening. The implications of these findings for screening frequency are briefly discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1764377      PMCID: PMC1977849          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1991.477

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  8 in total

1.  Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality.

Authors:  S Shapiro; W Venet; P Strax; L Venet; R Roeser
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1982-08       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Detection method, tumour size and node metastases in breast cancers diagnosed during a trial of breast cancer screening.

Authors:  L Tabar; S W Duffy; U B Krusemo
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol       Date:  1987-07

3.  Effects of repeated mammographic screening on breast cancer stage distribution. Results from a randomised study of 92 934 women in a Swedish county.

Authors:  G Fagerberg; L Baldetorp; O Gröntoft; B Lundström; J C Månson; B Nordenskjöld
Journal:  Acta Radiol Oncol       Date:  1985 Nov-Dec

4.  The Swedish two county trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer: recent results and calculation of benefit.

Authors:  L Tabar; G Fagerberg; S W Duffy; N E Day
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 3.710

5.  Regional heterogeneity in breast carcinoma: thymidine labelling index, steroid hormone receptors, DNA ploidy.

Authors:  J S Meyer; J L Wittliff
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1991-01-21       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare.

Authors:  L Tabár; C J Fagerberg; A Gad; L Baldetorp; L H Holmberg; O Gröntoft; U Ljungquist; B Lundström; J C Månson; G Eklund
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-04-13       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  A prognostic index in primary breast cancer.

Authors:  J L Haybittle; R W Blamey; C W Elston; J Johnson; P J Doyle; F C Campbell; R I Nicholson; K Griffiths
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years.

Authors:  H J BLOOM; W W RICHARDSON
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1957-09       Impact factor: 7.640

  8 in total
  31 in total

Review 1.  Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  J Ringash
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-02-20       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Survival and reduction in mortality from breast cancer. Impact of mammographic screening is not clear.

Authors:  M Baum
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-12-09

Review 3.  The molecular pathology of breast cancer progression.

Authors:  Alessandro Bombonati; Dennis C Sgroi
Journal:  J Pathol       Date:  2010-11-16       Impact factor: 7.996

4.  CJS debate: Is mammography useful in average-risk screening for breast cancer?

Authors:  Muriel Brackstone; Steven Latosinsky; Elizabeth Saettler; Ralph George
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 2.089

5.  Aggressiveness of breast cancers detected by screening.

Authors:  S W Duffy
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1992-05-23

6.  Cancerous breast lesions on dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: computerized characterization for image-based prognostic markers.

Authors:  Neha Bhooshan; Maryellen L Giger; Sanaz A Jansen; Hui Li; Li Lan; Gillian M Newstead
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Calculating appropriate target cancer detection rates and expected interval cancer rates for the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme. Interval Cancer Working Group.

Authors:  S Moss; R Blanks
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Preliminary results of primary screening for breast cancer with the Mama Program.

Authors:  G Gästrin
Journal:  Soz Praventivmed       Date:  1993

9.  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

10.  Genomic heterogeneity of breast tumor pathogenesis.

Authors:  Rachel E Ellsworth; Jeffrey A Hooke; Craig D Shriver; Darrell L Ellsworth
Journal:  Clin Med Oncol       Date:  2009-07-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.