Literature DB >> 20512656

A remarkable reduction of breast cancer deaths in screened versus unscreened women: a case-referent study.

Ellen Paap1, Roland Holland, Gerard J den Heeten, Guido van Schoor, Anita A M Botterweck, André L M Verbeek, Mireille J M Broeders.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We designed a case-referent study to investigate the effect of mammographic screening at the individual level, looking at the association of breast cancer death with screening history.
METHODS: The study population included all women aged 50-75 in the province of Limburg, the Netherlands who had been invited to the screening program from 1989 to 2006. From this population, 118 cases originated who died of breast cancer in 2004 or 2005. The screening history of these cases was collected and compared with a sample of the invited population. The breast cancer death rate in the screened relative to the unscreened women was estimated as the odds ratio (OR). This OR was adjusted for self-selection bias, the difference in baseline risk for breast cancer death between screened and unscreened women.
RESULTS: Analysis of the data showed a breast cancer mortality reduction of 70% in the screened versus the unscreened women (OR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.14-0.63). The magnitude of self-selection was estimated specifically for Limburg. After correction for self-selection bias, the effect of screening increased to 76% (OR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58).
CONCLUSION: Screening resulted in a remarkable reduction in breast cancer mortality. Contrary to findings in other countries, adjustment for self-selection in Limburg had no influence on the impact of screening. Thanks to a well-organized centralized screening program, similar results are expected in other regions of the Netherlands.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20512656     DOI: 10.1007/s10552-010-9585-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Causes Control        ISSN: 0957-5243            Impact factor:   2.506


  19 in total

1.  Residual confounding after adjustment for age: a minor issue in breast cancer screening effectiveness.

Authors:  Guido van Schoor; Ellen Paap; Mireille J M Broeders; André L M Verbeek
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 8.082

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

Review 3.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors:  M G Marmot; D G Altman; D A Cameron; J A Dewar; S G Thompson; M Wilcox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 7.640

Review 4.  The breast surgeons' approach to mastectomy and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Toni Storm-Dickerson; Noemi M Sigalove
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-02

5.  Precision biopsy of breast microcalcifications: An improvement in surgical excision.

Authors:  You Peng; Zhong-Yao Luo; Jie Ni; Hai-Dong Cui; Bei Lu; Ai-Zhai Xiang; Jun Zhou; Jin-Wang Ding; Wen-Hui Chen; Jing Zhao; Jian-Hua Fang; Pan Zhao
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 2.967

6.  More misinformation on breast cancer screening.

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

Review 7.  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

8.  Kin KeeperSM: design and baseline characteristics of a community-based randomized controlled trial promoting cancer screening in Black, Latina, and Arab women.

Authors:  Karen Patricia Williams; LeeAnne Roman; Cristian Ioan Meghea; Louis Penner; Adnan Hammad; Joseph Gardiner
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-12-28       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  Stage-specific breast cancer incidence rates among participants and non-participants of a population-based mammographic screening program.

Authors:  Solveig Hofvind; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Increased Cancer Detection Rate and Variations in the Recall Rate Resulting from Implementation of 3D Digital Breast Tomosynthesis into a Population-based Screening Program.

Authors:  Richard E Sharpe; Shambavi Venkataraman; Jordana Phillips; Vandana Dialani; Valerie J Fein-Zachary; Seema Prakash; Priscilla J Slanetz; Tejas S Mehta
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 11.105

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.