Literature DB >> 26756332

The Effect of Treatment Advances on the Mortality Results of Breast Cancer Screening Trials: A Microsimulation Model.

Jeanette Birnbaum, Vijayakrishna K Gadi, Elan Markowitz, Ruth Etzioni.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mammography trials, which are the primary sources of evidence for screening benefit, were conducted decades ago. Whether advances in systemic therapies have rendered previously observed benefits of screening less significant is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of breast cancer screening trials had they been conducted using contemporary systemic treatments with outcomes of trials conducted with previously used treatments.
DESIGN: Computer simulation model of 3 virtual screening trials with similar reductions in advanced-stage cancer cases but reflecting treatment patterns in 1975 (prechemotherapy era), 1999, or 2015 (treatment according to receptor status). DATA SOURCES: Meta-analyses of screening and treatment trials; study of dissemination of primary systemic treatments; SEER (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results) registry. TARGET POPULATION: U.S. women aged 50 to 74 years. TIME HORIZON: 10 and 25 years. PERSPECTIVE: Population. INTERVENTION: Mammography, chemotherapy, tamoxifen, aromatase inhibitors, and trastuzumab. OUTCOME MEASURES: Breast cancer mortality rate ratio (MRR) and absolute risk reduction (ARR) obtained by the difference in cumulative breast cancer mortality between control and screening groups. RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: At 10 years, screening in a 1975 trial yielded an MRR of 90% and an ARR of 5 deaths per 10,000 women. A 2015 screening trial yielded a 10-year MRR of 90% and an ARR of 3 deaths per 10,000 women. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Greater reductions in advanced-stage disease yielded a greater screening effect, but MRRs remained similar across trials. However, ARRs were consistently lower under contemporary treatments. When contemporary treatments were available only for early-stage cases, the MRR was 88%. LIMITATION: Disease models simplify reality and cannot capture all breast cancer subtypes.
CONCLUSION: Advances in systemic therapies for breast cancer have not substantively reduced the relative benefits of screening but have likely reduced the absolute benefits because of their positive effect on breast cancer survival. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: University of Washington and National Cancer Institute.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26756332      PMCID: PMC5356482          DOI: 10.7326/M15-0754

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  36 in total

1.  The harms of screening: new attention to an old concern.

Authors:  Steven H Woolf; Russell Harris
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 2.  Predictive and prognostic biomarkers with therapeutic targets in breast, colorectal, and non-small cell lung cancers: a systemic review of current development, evidence, and recommendation.

Authors:  Clement Chung; Matthew Christianson
Journal:  J Oncol Pharm Pract       Date:  2013-03-14       Impact factor: 1.809

3.  Screening is only part of the answer to breast cancer.

Authors:  Russell Harris
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Personalized oncology: recent advances and future challenges.

Authors:  Madhu Kalia
Journal:  Metabolism       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 8.694

Review 5.  A review of triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Roohi Ismail-Khan; Marilyn M Bui
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 3.302

6.  Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100,000 women in 123 randomised trials.

Authors:  R Peto; C Davies; J Godwin; R Gray; H C Pan; M Clarke; D Cutter; S Darby; P McGale; C Taylor; Y C Wang; J Bergh; A Di Leo; K Albain; S Swain; M Piccart; K Pritchard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 79.321

7.  Meta-analysis of breast cancer outcomes in adjuvant trials of aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen.

Authors:  Mitch Dowsett; Jack Cuzick; Jim Ingle; Alan Coates; John Forbes; Judith Bliss; Marc Buyse; Michael Baum; Aman Buzdar; Marco Colleoni; Charles Coombes; Claire Snowdon; Michael Gnant; Raimund Jakesz; Manfred Kaufmann; Francesco Boccardo; Jon Godwin; Christina Davies; Richard Peto
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-11-30       Impact factor: 44.544

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.  Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: randomised screening trial.

Authors:  Anthony B Miller; Claus Wall; Cornelia J Baines; Ping Sun; Teresa To; Steven A Narod
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2014-02-11
View more
  13 in total

1.  Matching Microsimulation Risk Factor Correlations to Cross-sectional Data: The Shortest Distance Method.

Authors:  Sze-Chuan Suen; Jeremy D Goldhaber-Fiebert; Sanjay Basu
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.583

Review 2.  How Can Advanced Imaging Be Used to Mitigate Potential Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis?

Authors:  Habib Rahbar; Elizabeth S McDonald; Janie M Lee; Savannah C Partridge; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2016-03-23       Impact factor: 3.173

3.  Cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening and prevention: a systematic review with a focus on risk-adapted strategies.

Authors:  Nikolai Mühlberger; Gaby Sroczynski; Artemisa Gogollari; Beate Jahn; Nora Pashayan; Ewout Steyerberg; Martin Widschwendter; Uwe Siebert
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2021-08-03

4.  Harms and Benefits of Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Bernt-Peter Robra
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

5.  Early detection and treatment strategies for breast cancer in low-income and upper middle-income countries: a modelling study.

Authors:  Jeanette K Birnbaum; Catherine Duggan; Benjamin O Anderson; Ruth Etzioni
Journal:  Lancet Glob Health       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 26.763

Review 6.  Population-based screening for cancer: hope and hype.

Authors:  Yiwey Shieh; Martin Eklund; George F Sawaya; William C Black; Barnett S Kramer; Laura J Esserman
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 66.675

7.  Observed and Predicted Risk of Breast Cancer Death in Randomized Trials on Breast Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Mathieu Boniol; Michel Smans; Richard Sullivan; Peter Boyle
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Effectiveness of and overdiagnosis from mammography screening in the Netherlands: population based study.

Authors:  Philippe Autier; Magali Boniol; Alice Koechlin; Cécile Pizot; Mathieu Boniol
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2017-12-05

9.  Trends in incidence, mortality and survival in women with breast cancer from 1985 to 2012 in Granada, Spain: a population-based study.

Authors:  José Antonio Baeyens-Fernández; Elena Molina-Portillo; Marina Pollán; Miguel Rodríguez-Barranco; Rosario Del Moral; Lorenzo Arribas-Mir; Emilio Sánchez-Cantalejo Ramírez; María-José Sánchez
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2018-08-02       Impact factor: 4.430

10.  Effect of screening mammography on breast cancer mortality: Quasi-experimental evidence from rollout of the Dutch population-based program with 17-year follow-up of a cohort.

Authors:  Tom Van Ourti; Owen O'Donnell; Hale Koç; Jacques Fracheboud; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2019-08-07       Impact factor: 7.396

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.