Literature DB >> 20306293

Breast cancer risk assessment in a mammography screening program and participation in the IBIS-II chemoprevention trial.

Christian R Loehberg1, Sebastian M Jud, Lothar Haeberle, Katharina Heusinger, Gerhard Dilbat, Alexander Hein, Claudia Rauh, Peter Dall, Nadine Rix, Sabrina Heinrich, Stefan Buchholz, Benno Lex, Barbara Reichler, Boris Adamietz, Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland, Matthias W Beckmann, Peter A Fasching.   

Abstract

It has been shown in several studies that antihormonal compounds can offer effective prophylactic treatment to prevent breast cancer. In view of the low participation rates in chemoprevention trials, the purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of women taking part in a population-based mammography screening program who wished to obtain information about the risk of breast cancer and then participate in the the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II (IBIS-II) trial, a randomized double-blind controlled chemoprevention trial comparing anastrozole with placebo. A paper-based survey was conducted in a population-based mammography screening program in Germany between 2007 and 2009. All women who met the criteria for the mammography screening program were invited to complete a questionnaire. A total of 2,524 women completed the questionnaire, and 17.7% (n = 446) met the eligibility criteria for the IBIS-II trial after risk assessment. The women who wished to receive further information about chemoprevention were significantly younger (P < 0.01) and had significantly more children (P = 0.03) and significantly more relatives with breast cancer (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the participants with regard to body mass index or hormone replacement therapy. Normal mammographic findings at screening were the main reason (42%) for declining to participate in the IBIS-II trial or attend risk counseling. The ultimate rate of recruitment to the IBIS-II trial was very low (three women). Offering chemoprevention to women within a mammography screening unit as part of a paper-based survey resulted in low participation rates for both, the survey and the final participation in the IBIS-II trial. More individualized approaches and communication of breast cancer risk at the time of the risk assessment might be helpful to increase the participation and the understanding of chemopreventive approaches.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20306293     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-010-0845-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  16 in total

Review 1.  Reasons for and against participation in studies of medicinal therapies for women with breast cancer: a debate.

Authors:  Gero Luschin; Marion Habersack; Irmina-Anna Gerlich
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2012-03-11       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  Breast Cancer Chemoprevention among High-risk Women and those with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

Authors:  Laura L Reimers; Parijatham S Sivasubramanian; Dawn Hershman; Mary Beth Terry; Heather Greenlee; Julie Campbell; Kevin Kalinsky; Matthew Maurer; Ramona Jayasena; Rossy Sandoval; Maria Alvarez; Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2015-04-16       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Addressing barriers to uptake of breast cancer chemoprevention for patients and providers.

Authors:  Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book       Date:  2015

4.  Percent Mammographic Density and Dense Area as Risk Factors for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  C Rauh; C C Hack; L Häberle; A Hein; A Engel; M G Schrauder; P A Fasching; S M Jud; A B Ekici; C R Loehberg; M Meier-Meitinger; S Ozan; R Schulz-Wendtland; M Uder; A Hartmann; D L Wachter; M W Beckmann; K Heusinger
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.915

5.  Breast Cancer Risk - Genes, Environment and Clinics.

Authors:  P A Fasching; A B Ekici; B R Adamietz; D L Wachter; A Hein; C M Bayer; L Häberle; C R Loehberg; S M Jud; K Heusinger; M Rübner; C Rauh; M R Bani; M P Lux; R Schulz-Wendtland; A Hartmann; M W Beckmann
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.915

6.  The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Celine M Vachon; V Shane Pankratz; Christopher G Scott; Lothar Haeberle; Elad Ziv; Matthew R Jensen; Kathleen R Brandt; Dana H Whaley; Janet E Olson; Katharina Heusinger; Carolin C Hack; Sebastian M Jud; Matthias W Beckmann; Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland; Jeffrey A Tice; Aaron D Norman; Julie M Cunningham; Kristen S Purrington; Douglas F Easton; Thomas A Sellers; Karla Kerlikowske; Peter A Fasching; Fergus J Couch
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Chemoprevention Trial Feasibility Using Botanicals in Exceptionally High Risk Populations for Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Nagi B Kumar; Gwendolyn P Quinn; Mark G Alexandrow; Jhanelle Gray; Michael Schell; Steve Sutton; Eric B Haura
Journal:  J Clin Trials       Date:  2014-09

8.  Tamoxifen vs Raloxifene vs Exemestane for Chemoprevention.

Authors:  Laura Reimers; Katherine D Crew
Journal:  Curr Breast Cancer Rep       Date:  2012-09-01

9.  Diagnostic Accuracy of Breast Medical Tactile Examiners (MTEs): A Prospective Pilot Study.

Authors:  Michael P Lux; Julius Emons; Mayada R Bani; Marius Wunderle; Charlotte Sell; Caroline Preuss; Claudia Rauh; Sebastian M Jud; Felix Heindl; Hanna Langemann; Thomas Geyer; Anna-Lisa Brandl; Carolin C Hack; Werner Adler; Rüdiger Schulz-Wendtland; Matthias W Beckmann; Peter A Fasching; Paul Gass
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2019-01-30       Impact factor: 2.860

10.  Perceptions of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer Regarding the Use of a Web-Based Decision Aid for Chemoprevention: Qualitative Study Nested Within a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Tarsha Jones; Ashlee Guzman; Thomas Silverman; Katherine Freeman; Rita Kukafka; Katherine Crew
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-06-08       Impact factor: 5.428

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.