Literature DB >> 21658406

The evidence base for breast cancer screening.

Paul Glasziou1, Nehmat Houssami.   

Abstract

The history of breast cancer screening is littered with controversy. With 10 trials spanning 4 decades, we have a substantial body of evidence, but with different aims and flaws. Combined analysis of the intention-to-treat results gives an overall relative reduction in breast cancer mortality of 19% (95% CI 12%-26%), which, if adjusted for non-attendance gives an approximate 25% relative reduction for those who attend screening. However, given that 4% of all-cause mortality is due to breast cancer deaths, this translates into a less than 1% reduction in all-cause mortality. An emerging issue in interpretation is the improvements in treatment since these trials recruited women. Modern systemic therapy would have improved survival (models suggest between 12% and 21%) in both screened and non-screened groups, which would result in a lesser difference in absolute risk reduction from screening but probably a similar, or slightly smaller, relative risk reduction. However benefits and harms, particularly over-diagnosis, need to balanced and differ by age-groups. The informed views of recipients of screening are needed to guide current and future policy on screening.
Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21658406     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.05.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  20 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Mammography interval and breast cancer mortality in women over the age of 75.

Authors:  Michael S Simon; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller; Cynthia A Thomson; Roberta M Ray; F Allan Hubbell; Lawrence Lessin; Dorothy S Lane; Lew H Kuller
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Application of breast tomosynthesis in screening: incremental effect on mammography acquisition and reading time.

Authors:  D Bernardi; S Ciatto; M Pellegrini; V Anesi; S Burlon; E Cauli; M Depaoli; L Larentis; V Malesani; L Targa; P Baldo; N Houssami
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Proportional incidence and radiological review of large (T2+) breast cancers as surrogate indicators of screening programme performance.

Authors:  S Ciatto; D Bernardi; M Pellegrini; G Borsato; P Peterlongo; M A Gentilini; F Caumo; A Frigerio; N Houssami
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2011-12-27       Impact factor: 5.315

5.  Integrating mammographic breast density in glandular dose calculation.

Authors:  Moayyad E Suleiman; Patrick C Brennan; Ernest Ekpo; Peter Kench; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-02-13       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  To screen or not to screen for breast cancer? How do modelling studies answer the question?

Authors:  R G Koleva-Kolarova; Z Zhan; M J W Greuter; T L Feenstra; G H De Bock
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  Multi-centre analysis of incidental findings on low-resolution CT attenuation correction images.

Authors:  J Coward; R Lawson; T Kane; M Elias; A Howes; J Birchall; P Hogg
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Sulfated polysaccharide-protein complex sensitizes doxorubicin-induced apoptosis of breast cancer cells in vitro and in vivo.

Authors:  Jie Wang; Hua Jian Wu; Chao Zhu Zhou; Hao Wang
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2016-08-04       Impact factor: 2.447

9.  Breast Cancer in Nepal: Current status and future directions.

Authors:  Mohan Giri; Mamata Giri; Rabin Jung Thapa; Bibhuti Upreti; Bijay Pariyar
Journal:  Biomed Rep       Date:  2018-02-05

Review 10.  Breast cancer screening: the questions answered.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Laura J Esserman; Chris I Flowers; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 66.675

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.