OBJECTIVE: To provide health care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on the diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). PARTICIPANTS: An non-DHHS, nonadvocate 14-member panel representing the fields of fields of oncology, radiology, surgery (general and reconstructive), pathology, radiation oncology, internal medicine, epidemiology, biostatistics, nursing, obstetrics and gynecology, preventative medicine and population health, and social work. In addition, 22 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and management of DCIS is highly complex with many unanswered questions, including the fundamental natural history of untreated disease. Because of the noninvasive nature of DCIS, coupled with its favorable prognosis, strong consideration should be given to remove the anxiety-producing term "carcinoma" from the description of DCIS. The outcomes in women treated with available therapies are excellent. Thus, the primary question for future research must focus on the accurate identification of patient subsets diagnosed with DCIS, including those persons who may be managed with less therapeutic intervention without sacrificing the excellent outcomes presently achieved. Essential in this quest will be the development and validation of accurate risk stratification methods based on a comprehensive understanding of the clinical, radiological, pathological, and biological factors associated with DCIS.
OBJECTIVE: To provide health care providers, patients, and the general public with a responsible assessment of currently available data on the diagnosis and management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). PARTICIPANTS: An non-DHHS, nonadvocate 14-member panel representing the fields of fields of oncology, radiology, surgery (general and reconstructive), pathology, radiation oncology, internal medicine, epidemiology, biostatistics, nursing, obstetrics and gynecology, preventative medicine and population health, and social work. In addition, 22 experts from pertinent fields presented data to the panel and conference audience. EVIDENCE: Presentations by experts and a systematic review of the literature prepared by the Minnesota Evidence-based Practice Center, through the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Scientific evidence was given precedence over anecdotal experience. CONFERENCE PROCESS: The panel drafted its statement based on scientific evidence presented in open forum and on published scientific literature. The draft statement was presented on the final day of the conference and circulated to the audience for comment. The panel released a revised statement later that day at http://consensus.nih.gov. This statement is an independent report of the panel and is not a policy statement of the NIH or the Federal Government. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis and management of DCIS is highly complex with many unanswered questions, including the fundamental natural history of untreated disease. Because of the noninvasive nature of DCIS, coupled with its favorable prognosis, strong consideration should be given to remove the anxiety-producing term "carcinoma" from the description of DCIS. The outcomes in women treated with available therapies are excellent. Thus, the primary question for future research must focus on the accurate identification of patient subsets diagnosed with DCIS, including those persons who may be managed with less therapeutic intervention without sacrificing the excellent outcomes presently achieved. Essential in this quest will be the development and validation of accurate risk stratification methods based on a comprehensive understanding of the clinical, radiological, pathological, and biological factors associated with DCIS.
Authors: Oyewale O Shiyanbola; Brian L Sprague; John M Hampton; Kim Dittus; Ted A James; Sally Herschorn; Ronald E Gangnon; Donald L Weaver; Amy Trentham-Dietz Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-05-31 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Andrew W Dick; Melony S Sorbero; Gretchen M Ahrendt; James A Hayman; Heather T Gold; Linda Schiffhauer; Azadeh Stark; Jennifer J Griggs Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2011-01-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Habib Rahbar; Elizabeth S McDonald; Janie M Lee; Savannah C Partridge; Christoph I Lee Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2016-03-23 Impact factor: 3.173