Literature DB >> 23680691

Breast cancer phenotype, nodal status and palpability may be useful in the detection of overdiagnosed screening-detected breast cancers.

O Brouckaert1, A Schoneveld2, C Truyers3, E Kellen4, C Van Ongeval2, I Vergote2, P Moerman2, G Floris2, H Wildiers2, M R Christiaens2, E Van Limbergen2, P Neven2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer remains the leading cause of female cancer death despite improvements in treatment and screening. Screening is often criticized for leading to overdiagnosis and overtreatment. However, few have attempted to identify overdiagnosed cases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A large, consecutive series of patients treated for primary operable, screening-detected, breast cancer (n = 1610). Details from pathology and clinical reports, treatment and follow-up were available from our prospectively managed database. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional models were used to study the prognostic variables in screening-detected breast cancers for distant metastatic and breast cancer-specific survival.
RESULTS: We included 1610 patients. The mean/median follow-up was 6.0/6.0 years. Univariate analysis: tumor size, palpability, breast cancer phenotype and nodal status were predictors of distant metastasis and breast cancer-specific death. Multivariate analysis: palpability, breast cancer phenotype and nodal status remained independent prognostic variables. Palpability differed by breast cancer phenotype.
CONCLUSION: Screening-detected breast cancer is associated with excellent outcome. Palpability, nodal status and breast cancer phenotype are independent prognostic variables that may select patients at increased risk for distant metastatic relapse and breast cancer-specific death. Overdiagnosed cases reside most likely in the nonpalpable node negative subgroup with a Luminal A phenotype.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; palpability; prognosis; screening; subtypes

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23680691     DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt179

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Oncol        ISSN: 0923-7534            Impact factor:   32.976


  12 in total

1.  Downregulation of E-cadherin expression in breast cancer by promoter hypermethylation and its relation with progression and prognosis of tumor.

Authors:  Shohreh Alizadeh Shargh; Meral Sakizli; Vahid Khalaj; Abolfazl Movafagh; Hamidreza Yazdi; Elmira Hagigatjou; Aresou Sayad; Neda Mansouri; Seyed Abdolreza Mortazavi-Tabatabaei; Hamid Reza Khorram Khorshid
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-09-27       Impact factor: 3.064

2.  Biological ageing and frailty markers in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Barbara Brouwers; Bruna Dalmasso; Sigrid Hatse; Annouschka Laenen; Cindy Kenis; Evalien Swerts; Patrick Neven; Ann Smeets; Patrick Schöffski; Hans Wildiers
Journal:  Aging (Albany NY)       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 5.682

3.  Breast Cancer Survival Defined by the ER/PR/HER2 Subtypes and a Surrogate Classification according to Tumor Grade and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers.

Authors:  Carol A Parise; Vincent Caggiano
Journal:  J Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2014-05-26

4.  Circulating MicroRNAs as easy-to-measure aging biomarkers in older breast cancer patients: correlation with chronological age but not with fitness/frailty status.

Authors:  Sigrid Hatse; Barbara Brouwers; Bruna Dalmasso; Annouschka Laenen; Cindy Kenis; Patrick Schöffski; Hans Wildiers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Cumulative risk of false positive test in relation to breast symptoms in mammography screening: a historical prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Deependra Singh; Janne Pitkäniemi; Nea Malila; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Association of symptoms and interval breast cancers in the mammography-screening programme: population-based matched cohort study.

Authors:  Deependra Singh; Joonas Miettinen; Stephen Duffy; Nea Malila; Janne Pitkäniemi; Ahti Anttila
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2018-11-07       Impact factor: 7.640

7.  Breast Cancer Classification Based on Proteotypes Obtained by SWATH Mass Spectrometry.

Authors:  Pavel Bouchal; Olga T Schubert; Jakub Faktor; Lenka Capkova; Hana Imrichova; Karolina Zoufalova; Vendula Paralova; Roman Hrstka; Yansheng Liu; Holger Alexander Ebhardt; Eva Budinska; Rudolf Nenutil; Ruedi Aebersold
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2019-07-16       Impact factor: 9.423

8.  The Influence of Socioeconomic Status on Racial/Ethnic Disparities among the ER/PR/HER2 Breast Cancer Subtypes.

Authors:  Carol A Parise; Vincent Caggiano
Journal:  J Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2015-08-03

9.  High-infiltration of tumor-associated macrophages predicts unfavorable clinical outcome for node-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Yue Zhang; Shaoqiang Cheng; Mingyan Zhang; Lina Zhen; Da Pang; Qingyuan Zhang; Zhigao Li
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-30       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The influence of breast cancer subtype on survival after palliative radiation for osseous metastases.

Authors:  Mohamed K Abdelhakiem; Candice Johnstone; Carmen Bergom; Adam Currey; Jared R Robbins
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2020-11-04       Impact factor: 4.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.