Literature DB >> 20882563

Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49 years: evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in Young Women (SCRY) cohort.

Barbro Numan Hellquist1, Stephen W Duffy, Shahin Abdsaleh, Lena Björneld, Pál Bordás, László Tabár, Bedrich Viták, Sophia Zackrisson, Lennarth Nyström, Håkan Jonsson.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of mammography screening for women ages 40 to 49 years still is questioned, and few studies of the effectiveness of service screening for this age group have been conducted.
METHODS: Breast cancer mortality was compared between women who were invited to service screening at ages 40 to 49 years (study group) and women in the same age group who were not invited during 1986 to 2005 (control group). Together, these women comprise the Mammography Screening of Young Women (SCRY) cohort, which includes all Swedish counties. A prescreening period was defined to facilitate a comparison of mortality in the absence of screening. The outcome measure was refined mortality, ie, breast cancer death for women who were diagnosed during follow-up at ages 40 to 49 years. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in breast cancer mortality during the prescreening period. During the study period, there were 803 breast cancer deaths in the study group (7.3 million person-years) and 1238 breast cancer deaths in the control group (8.8 million person-years). The average follow-up was 16 years. The estimated RR for women who were invited to screening was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.83), and the RR for women who attended screening was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.62-0.80).
CONCLUSIONS: In this comprehensive study, mammography screening for women ages 40 to 49 years was efficient for reducing breast cancer mortality.
Copyright © 2010 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20882563     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.25650

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  52 in total

1.  Association between persistence with mammography screening and stage at diagnosis among elderly women diagnosed with breast cancer.

Authors:  Ami Vyas; Suresh Madhavan; Usha Sambamoorthi
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-11-16       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Is age still the deciding factor? Commentary on "The effect of age on delay in diagnosis and stage of breast cancer" by Partridge et al.

Authors:  Jennifer Keating Litton
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2012-04-24

3.  Help me in my confusion: should we think more about mammography and colonoscopy as "preference sensitive care'?

Authors:  Joseph O'Donnell
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 2.037

4.  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

5.  Imaging of Her2-targeted magnetic nanoparticles for breast cancer detection: comparison of SQUID-detected magnetic relaxometry and MRI.

Authors:  Natalie L Adolphi; Kimberly S Butler; Debbie M Lovato; T E Tessier; Jason E Trujillo; Helen J Hathaway; Danielle L Fegan; Todd C Monson; Tyler E Stevens; Dale L Huber; Jaivijay Ramu; Michelle L Milne; Stephen A Altobelli; Howard C Bryant; Richard S Larson; Edward R Flynn
Journal:  Contrast Media Mol Imaging       Date:  2012 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.161

6.  Interpretation of digital breast tomosynthesis: preliminary study on comparison with picture archiving and communication system (PACS) and dedicated workstation.

Authors:  Young Seon Kim; Jung Min Chang; Ann Yi; Sung Ui Shin; Myung Eun Lee; Won Hwa Kim; Nariya Cho; Woo Kyung Moon
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 3.039

7.  Promoting mammography adherence in underserved women: the telephone coaching adherence study.

Authors:  Vanessa B Sheppard; Judy Huei-yu Wang; Jennifer Eng-Wong; Shiela Harmon Martin; Alejandra Hurtado-de-Mendoza; George Luta
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2013-02-13       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  Anatomical complexity in breast parenchyma and its implications for optimal breast imaging strategies.

Authors:  Lin Chen; Craig K Abbey; Anita Nosratieh; Karen K Lindfors; John M Boone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.071

9.  Mortality and recurrence patterns of breast cancer patients diagnosed under a screening programme versus comparable non-screened breast cancer patients from the same population: analytical survey from 2002 to 2012.

Authors:  A García Fernández; C Chabrera; M García Font; M Fraile; J M Lain; S Gónzalez; C Corral; M Torras; J Torres; M Teixido; I Barco; R López; C Gónzalez; A Pessarrodona; N Giménez
Journal:  Tumour Biol       Date:  2013-10-09

Review 10.  Breast cancer screening: review of benefits and harms, and recommendations for developing and low-income countries.

Authors:  Meteb Al-Foheidi; Mubarak M Al-Mansour; Ezzeldin M Ibrahim
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 3.064

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.