Literature DB >> 22833199

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

Solveig Hofvind1, Christoph I Lee, Joann G Elmore.   

Abstract

The Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program was rolled out county by county over the course of a decade, from 1996 to 2005, and now encompasses all Norwegian women aged 50-69 years. We aim to compare DCIS and stage-specific invasive breast cancer incidence rates among participants, non-participants, and women not yet invited to the screening program over this entire implementation period. We estimate stage-specific breast tumor incidence rates for 640,347 women 50-69 years of age invited to the screening program between 1996 and 2007. We compare incidence rates and stage distribution among women diagnosed with breast cancer who were invited and participated, invited but not participated, and women not yet invited to the screening program using two-sided Chi-squared tests to determine statistical significance between groups. The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) was 3.0 times higher and invasive breast cancer was 1.5 times higher for invited participants compared to invited non-participants (p < 0.001). While the incidence of Stage I cancer was two times higher among participants compared to non-participants (p < 0.001), the incidences of Stages III and IV cancer were two and three times lower, respectively, among participants compared to non-participants (p < 0.001 for both). No significant differences in stage-specific incidence or treatment utilization rates were observed between invited non-participants and not yet invited women, except for stage IV cancers, which were detected at a higher rate among women who were not yet invited (7.5 vs. 4.6 %, p = 0.001). Compared with women invited who did not participate, participants in the screening program are more likely to be diagnosed with DCIS and early stage invasive breast cancer and are less likely to be diagnosed with advanced stage breast cancer. More research is required to determine whether these differences in stage-specific incidences among invited participants and non-participants are associated with differences in mortality rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22833199      PMCID: PMC3751801          DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2162-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  24 in total

1.  Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Reduction in breast cancer mortality from the organised service screening with mammography: 2. Validation with alternative analytic methods.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 3.  Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials.

Authors:  Lennarth Nyström; Ingvar Andersson; Nils Bjurstam; Jan Frisell; Bo Nordenskjöld; Lars Erik Rutqvist
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-03-16       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Assessing the impact of screening mammography: Breast cancer incidence and mortality rates in Connecticut (1943-2002).

Authors:  William F Anderson; Ismail Jatoi; Susan S Devesa
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2006-05-09       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Natural history of breast cancers detected in the Swedish mammography screening programme: a cohort study.

Authors:  Per-Henrik Zahl; Peter C Gøtzsche; Jan Mæhlen
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2011-10-11       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Benefit of screening mammography in reducing the rate of late-stage breast cancer diagnoses (United States).

Authors:  Sandra A Norman; A Russell Localio; Lan Zhou; Anita L Weber; Ralph J Coates; Kathleen E Malone; Leslie Bernstein; Polly A Marchbanks; Jonathan M Liff; Nancy C Lee; Marion R Nadel
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 2.506

7.  Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening.

Authors:  Laszlo Tabar; Ming-Fang Yen; Bedrich Vitak; Hsiu-Hsi Tony Chen; Robert A Smith; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-04-26       Impact factor: 79.321

8.  The impact of organised screening programmes on the stage-specific incidence of breast cancer in some Italian areas.

Authors:  E Buiatti; A Barchielli; S Bartolacci; M Federico; V De Lisi; L Bucchi; S Ferretti; E Paci; N Segnan; R Tumino
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 9.162

9.  Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom.

Authors:  Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Philip W Chu; Diana L Miglioretti; Edward A Sickles; Roger Blanks; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Janet K Bobo; Nancy C Lee; Matthew G Wallis; Julietta Patnick; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-10-22       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  International variation in screening mammography interpretations in community-based programs.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Connie Y Nakano; Thomas D Koepsell; Laurel M Desnick; Carl J D'Orsi; David F Ransohoff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2003-09-17       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  12 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness of early cancer surveillance for patients with Li-Fraumeni syndrome.

Authors:  Casey R Tak; Eman Biltaji; Wendy Kohlmann; Luke Maese; Pierre Hainaut; Anita Villani; David Malkin; Catherine M T Sherwin; Diana I Brixner; Joshua D Schiffman
Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer       Date:  2019-02-04       Impact factor: 3.167

Review 2.  Lymph Node Radiotherapy Instead of Extended Axillary Surgery - the New Standard?

Authors:  Peter Niehoff; Silla Hey-Koch
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Equivalent Survival With Mastectomy or Breast-conserving Surgery Plus Radiation in Young Women Aged < 40 Years With Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A National Registry-based Stage-by-Stage Comparison.

Authors:  Jason C Ye; Weisi Yan; Paul J Christos; Dattatreyudu Nori; Akkamma Ravi
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2015-04-02       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Whole breast radiotherapy in cN0 early breast cancer patients with pathological sentinel lymph nodes (pN1mic, pN1a) without axillary dissection: preliminary results of the observational LISEN trial.

Authors:  Lucia Anna Ursini; Marianna Nuzzo; Consuelo Rosa; Marzia Borgia; Luciana Caravatta; Monica Di Tommaso; Marianna Trignani; Fiorella Cristina Di Guglielmo; Giampiero Ausili Cefaro; Domenico Angelucci; Marzia Muzi; Gianluigi Martino; Ettore Cianchetti; Simona Grossi; Saveria Tavoletta; Davide Brocco; Antonino Grassadonia; Nicola Tinari; Simona Gildetti; Nicola D'Ostilio; Liborio Stuppia; Annamaria Porreca; Marta Di Nicola; Domenico Genovesi
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  Body mass index and treatment outcomes following neoadjuvant therapy in women aged 45 y or younger: Evidence from a historic cohort.

Authors:  Massimiliano D'Aiuto; Andrea Chirico; Michele Antonio De Riggi; Giuseppe Frasci; Michelino De Laurentiis; Maurizio Di Bonito; Patrizia Vici; Laura Pizzuti; Domenico Sergi; Marcello Maugeri-Saccà; Maddalena Barba; Antonio Giordano
Journal:  Cancer Biol Ther       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 4.742

6.  Molecular subtypes, histopathological grade and survival in a historic cohort of breast cancer patients.

Authors:  M J Engstrøm; S Opdahl; A I Hagen; P R Romundstad; L A Akslen; O A Haugen; L J Vatten; A M Bofin
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2013-07-31       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  The distribution of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) grade in 4232 women and its impact on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  P A van Luijt; E A M Heijnsdijk; J Fracheboud; L I H Overbeek; M J M Broeders; J Wesseling; G J den Heeten; H J de Koning
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 6.466

Review 8.  Management of the Positive Axilla in 2017.

Authors:  Tolga Ozmen; Alicia Huff Vinyard; Eli Avisar
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-05-03

Review 9.  Is invasion a necessary step for metastases in breast cancer?

Authors:  Steven A Narod; Victoria Sopik
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-01-20       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Estimating changes in the rate of synchronous and metachronous metastases over time: Analysis of SEER data.

Authors:  Ugur Yilmaz; Lawrence B Marks
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2017-09-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.