Literature DB >> 21533752

Tumour doubling times and the length bias in breast cancer screening programmes.

Israel T Vieira1, Valter de Senna, Paul R Harper, Arjan K Shahani.   

Abstract

Screening for early detection of breast cancer is considered to be an important element of preventive medicine. In this paper, we use numerical simulations to examine the length bias in regular interval screening programmes, by computing the doubling times of breast cancer tumours detected through regular mammographies compared to self-detection. Our analysis shows that doubling times of tumours detected by a regular screening programme are longer than doubling times in the original whole population and considerably longer than those self-detected. Hence regular interval mammographies may be missing a high proportion of fast growing tumours and therefore the benefits of current screening programmes may need to be re-evaluated. We examine the likely size of the length bias for the present UK breast cancer screening programme and perform a sensitivity analysis by varying the screen detection probabilities to reflect future advances in mammographic detection.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21533752     DOI: 10.1007/s10729-011-9156-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci        ISSN: 1386-9620


  19 in total

Review 1.  Modeling the impact of adjuvant therapy and screening mammography on U.S. breast cancer mortality between 1975 and 2000: introduction to the problem.

Authors:  Eric J Feuer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2006

2.  A 13-year follow-up of patients with breast cancer presenting to a District General Hospital breast unit in southeast England.

Authors:  David Robinson; Janine Bell; Henrik Møller; Asad Salman
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2005-08-02       Impact factor: 4.380

3.  Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  O Olsen; P C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2001-10-20       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 4.  A comparative review of CISNET breast models used to analyze U.S. breast cancer incidence and mortality trends.

Authors:  Lauren D Clarke; Sylvia K Plevritis; Rob Boer; Kathleen A Cronin; Eric J Feuer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2006

5.  Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?

Authors:  P C Gøtzsche; O Olsen
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2000-01-08       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  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.

Authors:  Barbro Numan Hellquist; Stephen W Duffy; Shahin Abdsaleh; Lena Björneld; Pál Bordás; László Tabár; Bedrich Viták; Sophia Zackrisson; Lennarth Nyström; Håkan Jonsson
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 7.  Diversity of model approaches for breast cancer screening: a review of model assumptions by the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Network (CISNET) Breast Cancer Groups.

Authors:  Rob Boer; Sylvia Plevritis; Lauren Clarke
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  International comparison of performance measures for screening mammography: can it be done?

Authors:  B C Yankaskas; C N Klabunde; R Ancelle-Park; G Renner; H Wang; J Fracheboud; G Pou; J-L Bulliard
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.136

9.  Population screening and intensity of screening are associated with reduced breast cancer mortality: evidence of efficacy of mammography screening in Australia.

Authors:  D Roder; N Houssami; G Farshid; G Gill; C Luke; P Downey; K Beckmann; P Iosifidis; L Grieve; L Williamson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-05-22       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Decelerating growth and human breast cancer.

Authors:  J A Spratt; D von Fournier; J S Spratt; E E Weber
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1993-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.