Literature DB >> 26537645

Towards personalized screening: Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes in women with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer.

Theodora Maria Ripping1, Rebecca A Hubbard2, Johannes D M Otten1, Gerard J den Heeten3,4, André L M Verbeek1, Mireille J M Broeders1,3.   

Abstract

Several reviews have estimated the balance of benefits and harms of mammographic screening in the general population. The balance may, however, differ between individuals with and without family history. Therefore, our aim is to assess the cumulative risk of screening outcomes; screen-detected breast cancer, interval cancer, and false-positive results, in women screenees aged 50-75 and 40-75, with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer at the start of screening. Data on screening attendance, recall and breast cancer detection were collected for each woman living in Nijmegen (The Netherlands) since 1975. We used a discrete time survival model to calculate the cumulative probability of each major screening outcome over 19 screening rounds. Women with a family history of breast cancer had a higher risk of all screening outcomes. For women screened from age 50-75, the cumulative risk of screen-detected breast cancer, interval cancer and false-positive results were 9.0, 4.4 and 11.1% for women with a family history and 6.3, 2.7 and 7.3% for women without a family history, respectively. The results for women 40-75 followed the same pattern for women screened 50-75 for cancer outcomes, but were almost doubled for false-positive results. To conclude, women with a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer are more likely to experience benefits and harms of screening than women without a family history. To complete the balance and provide risk-based screening recommendations, the breast cancer mortality reduction and overdiagnosis should be estimated for family history subgroups.
© 2015 UICC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; false positive; family history; interval cancer; mammography; screen-detected; screening

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26537645      PMCID: PMC4983681          DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29912

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  33 in total

1.  Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study.

Authors:  Rebecca A Hubbard; Karla Kerlikowske; Chris I Flowers; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Weiwei Zhu; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 25.391

2.  Cost-effectiveness of different reading and referral strategies in mammography screening in the Netherlands.

Authors:  J H Groenewoud; J D M Otten; J Fracheboud; G Draisma; B M van Ineveld; R Holland; A L M Verbeek; H J de Koning
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 4.872

3.  Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  John T Schousboe; Karla Kerlikowske; Andrew Loh; Steven R Cummings
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 25.391

4.  Modelling the cumulative risk of a false-positive screening test.

Authors:  Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Robert A Smith
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2010-03-31       Impact factor: 3.021

Review 5.  The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies.

Authors:  Mireille Broeders; Sue Moss; Lennarth Nyström; Sisse Njor; Håkan Jonsson; Ellen Paap; Nathalie Massat; Stephen Duffy; Elsebeth Lynge; Eugenio Paci
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 2.136

Review 6.  Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Talya Salz; Sarah E Lillie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Breast screening: the psychological sequelae of false-positive recall in women with and without a family history of breast cancer.

Authors:  F J Gilbert; C M Cordiner; I R Affleck; D B Hood; D Mathieson; L G Walker
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 8.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-10-30       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 9.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04

10.  Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit analyses of risk-based screening strategies for breast cancer.

Authors:  Ester Vilaprinyo; Carles Forné; Misericordia Carles; Maria Sala; Roger Pla; Xavier Castells; Laia Domingo; Montserrat Rue
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-02-03       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  4 in total

1.  Cumulative Risk Distribution for Interval Invasive Second Breast Cancers After Negative Surveillance Mammography.

Authors:  Janie M Lee; Linn Abraham; Diana L Lam; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti; Nehmat Houssami; Constance D Lehman; Louise M Henderson; Rebecca A Hubbard
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes according to the presence of previous benign breast disease and family history of breast cancer: supporting personalised screening.

Authors:  M Román; M J Quintana; J Ferrer; M Sala; X Castells
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2017-04-20       Impact factor: 7.640

3.  Dutch women's intended participation in a risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention programme: a survey study identifying preferences, facilitators and barriers.

Authors:  Linda Rainey; Daniëlle van der Waal; Mireille J M Broeders
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 4.430

4.  Evaluating the Age-Based Recommendations for Long-Term Follow-Up in Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Annemieke Witteveen; Linda de Munck; Catharina G M Groothuis-Oudshoorn; Gabe S Sonke; Philip M Poortmans; Liesbeth J Boersma; Marjolein L Smidt; Ingrid M H Vliegen; Maarten J IJzerman; Sabine Siesling
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2020-06-29
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.