Literature DB >> 19805754

Comparing interval breast cancer rates in Norway and North Carolina: results and challenges.

Solveig Hofvind1, Bonnie C Yankaskas, Jean-Luc Bulliard, Carrie N Klabunde, Jacques Fracheboud.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare interval breast cancer rates (ICR) between a biennial organized screening programme in Norway and annual opportunistic screening in North Carolina (NC) for different conceptualizations of interval cancer.
SETTING: Two regions with different screening practices and performance.
METHODS: 620,145 subsequent screens (1996-2002) performed in women aged 50-69 and 1280 interval cancers were analysed. Various definitions and quantification methods for interval cancers were compared.
RESULTS: ICR for one year follow-up were lower in Norway compared with NC both when the rate was based on all screens (0.54 versus 1.29 per 1000 screens), negative final assessments (0.54 versus 1.29 per 1000 screens), and negative screening assessments (0.53 versus 1.28 per 1000 screens). The rate of ductal carcinoma in situ was significantly lower in Norway than in NC for cases diagnosed in both the first and second year after screening. The distributions of histopathological tumour size and lymph node involvement in invasive cases did not differ between the two regions for interval cancers diagnosed during the first year after screening. In contrast, in the second year after screening, tumour characteristics remained stable in Norway but became prognostically more favorable in NC.
CONCLUSION: Even when applying a common set of definitions of interval cancer, the ICR was lower in Norway than in NC. Different definitions of interval cancer did not influence the ICR within Norway or NC. Organization of screening and screening performance might be major contributors to the differences in ICR between Norway and NC.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19805754     DOI: 10.1258/jms.2009.009012

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


  12 in total

1.  PAM50 and Risk of Recurrence Scores for Interval Breast Cancers.

Authors:  Samantha Puvanesarajah; Sarah J Nyante; Cherie M Kuzmiak; Mengjie Chen; Chiu-Kit Tse; Xuezheng Sun; Emma H Allott; Erin L Kirk; Lisa A Carey; Charles M Perou; Andrew F Olshan; Louise M Henderson; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2018-04-05

2.  Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.

Authors:  Katja Kemp Jacobsen; Ellen S O'Meara; Dustin Key; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Ilse Vejborg; Brian L Sprague; Elsebeth Lynge; My von Euler-Chelpin
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 7.396

3.  Derived mammographic masking measures based on simulated lesions predict the risk of interval cancer after controlling for known risk factors: a case-case analysis.

Authors:  Benjamin Hinton; Lin Ma; Amir Pasha Mahmoudzadeh; Serghei Malkov; Bo Fan; Heather Greenwood; Bonnie Joe; Vivian Lee; Fredrik Strand; Karla Kerlikowske; John Shepherd
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Sensitivity and specificity of mammographic screening as practised in Vermont and Norway.

Authors:  S Hofvind; B M Geller; J Skelly; P M Vacek
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  [Limits of mammography screening: current controversies and perspectives].

Authors:  K Hellerhoff
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  Breast Cancer Screening in Asian Women with Dense Breast by Mammography: A Cross-Sectional Observational Study.

Authors:  Jung Sun Lee; Minkyung Oh
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2021-04-01

7.  Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Authors:  R L Bennett; S J Sellars; S M Moss
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2011-02-01       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  Impact of risk factors on different interval cancer subtypes in a population-based breast cancer screening programme.

Authors:  Jordi Blanch; Maria Sala; Josefa Ibáñez; Laia Domingo; Belén Fernandez; Arantza Otegi; Teresa Barata; Raquel Zubizarreta; Joana Ferrer; Xavier Castells; Montserrat Rué; Dolores Salas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Detection and interval cancer rates during the transition from screen-film to digital mammography in population-based screening.

Authors:  Valérie D V Sankatsing; Jacques Fracheboud; Linda de Munck; Mireille J M Broeders; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; André L M Verbeek; Johannes D M Otten; Ruud M Pijnappel; Sabine Siesling; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-03-05       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Cross-national comparison of screening mammography accuracy measures in U.S., Norway, and Spain.

Authors:  Laia Domingo; Solveig Hofvind; Rebecca A Hubbard; Marta Román; David Benkeser; Maria Sala; Xavier Castells
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.