Literature DB >> 22273849

Favourable prognostic factors of subsequent screen-detected breast cancers among women aged 50-69.

Anna M Chiarelli1, Sarah A Edwards, Amanda J Sheppard, Lucia Mirea, Nelson Chong, Lawrence Paszat, Rene S Shumak, Frances P Oʼmalley.   

Abstract

Most studies reporting more favourable biological features of screen-detected breast cancers compared with symptomatic or interval cancers include initial or prevalent screens and therefore may not indicate the real benefit of screening on breast cancer mortality. We conducted case-case comparisons within a cohort of eligible women (N=771 715) who were aged 50-69 between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2003. A randomly selected sample of breast cancers (N=1848) diagnosed among these women were compared by detection method. Tumour characteristics of interval cancers (N=362) diagnosed after 6-24 months of a negative screen or symptomatic breast cancers (N=491) were compared with subsequent screen-detected breast cancers diagnosed within 6 months of a positive screen (N=995) using polytomous logistic regression. Tumours were evaluated for clinical presentation, histology and expression of hormone receptors. Women with symptomatic detected [odds ratio (OR)=7.48, 95% confidence interval (CI)=5.38-10.38] and interval cancers (OR=2.20, 95% CI=1.56-3.10) were more often diagnosed at stage III-IV versus I than women with rescreen-detected cancers. After adjusting for tumour size, women with symptomatic cancers had tumours of higher grade (OR=1.50, 95% CI=1.05-2.15) and mitotic score (OR=1.69, 95% CI=1.15-2.49) and women with interval cancers had tumours of higher mitotic score (OR=1.52, 95% CI=1.01-2.28) compared with women diagnosed at screening. Subsequent screen-detected cancers are not only detected at an earlier stage but are also less aggressive, leading to a better prognosis. As long-term mortality reduction for breast screening may depend on subsequent screens, our study indicates that mammography screening can be effective in women aged 50-69.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22273849     DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e328350b0f4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev        ISSN: 0959-8278            Impact factor:   2.497


  14 in total

Review 1.  Geographic Access to Mammography and Its Relationship to Breast Cancer Screening and Stage at Diagnosis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Jenna A Khan-Gates; Jennifer L Ersek; Jan M Eberth; Swann A Adams; Sandi L Pruitt
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-07-26

2.  Annual vs Biennial Screening: Diagnostic Accuracy Among Concurrent Cohorts Within the Ontario Breast Screening Program.

Authors:  Anna M Chiarelli; Kristina M Blackmore; Lucia Mirea; Susan J Done; Vicky Majpruz; Ashini Weerasinghe; Linda Rabeneck; Derek Muradali
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Symptomatic Breast Cancer Awareness despite a Recent Screen: The Role of Tumor Biology and Mammography Facility Characteristics.

Authors:  Mylove Mortel; Garth H Rauscher; Anne Marie Murphy; Kent Hoskins; Richard B Warnecke
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Bahcesehir long-term population-based screening compared to National Breast Cancer Registry Data: effectiveness of screening in an emerging country.

Authors:  Sibel Ozkan Gurdal; Ayse Nilufer Ozaydın; Erkin Aribal; Beyza Ozcinar; Neslihan Cabioglu; Cennet Sahin; Vahit Ozmen
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.630

5.  Impact of familial risk and mammography screening on prognostic indicators of breast disease among women from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Authors:  Meghan J Walker; Lucia Mirea; Kristine Cooper; Mitra Nabavi; Gord Glendon; Irene L Andrulis; Julia A Knight; Frances P O'Malley; Anna M Chiarelli
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.375

6.  Factors associated with wait times across the breast cancer treatment pathway in Ontario.

Authors:  Amalia Plotogea; Anna M Chiarelli; Lucia Mirea; Maegan V Prummel; Nelson Chong; Rene S Shumak; Frances P O'Malley; Claire M B Holloway
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2013-08-19

7.  St Gallen molecular subtypes in screening-detected and symptomatic breast cancer in a prospective cohort with long-term follow-up.

Authors:  A K Falck; A Röme; M Fernö; H Olsson; G Chebil; P O Bendahl; L Rydén
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  The impact of the Polish mass breast cancer screening program on prognosis in the Pomeranian Province.

Authors:  Piotr Woźniacki; Jarosław Skokowski; Krzystof Bartoszek; Anna Kosowska; Leszek Kalinowski; Janusz Jaśkiewicz
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 3.318

9.  Clinical and prognostic factors associated with diagnostic wait times by breast cancer detection method.

Authors:  Amalia Plotogea; Anna M Chiarelli; Lucia Mirea; Maegan V Prummel; Nelson Chong; Rene S Shumak; Frances P O'Malley; Claire Mb Holloway
Journal:  Springerplus       Date:  2014-03-06

10.  Validity of Administrative Databases in Comparison to Medical Charts for Breast Cancer Treatment Data.

Authors:  Ashini Weerasinghe; Courtney R Smith; Vicky Majpruz; Anjali Pandya; Kristina M Blackmore; Claire M B Holloway; Roanne Segal-Nadlere; Cathy Paroschy Harris; Ashley Hendry; Amanda Hey; Anat Kornecki; George Lougheed; Barbara-Anne Maier; Patricia Marchand; David McCready; Carol Rand; Simon Raphael; Neelu Sehgal; Anna M Chiarelli
Journal:  J Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2018-05-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.