Literature DB >> 26756588

Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation.

Heidi D Nelson, Rochelle Fu, Amy Cantor, Miranda Pappas, Monica Daeges, Linda Humphrey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years.
PURPOSE: To review studies of the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in average-risk women. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases to 4 June 2015. STUDY SELECTION: English-language randomized, controlled trials and observational studies of screening with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography that reported breast cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, or advanced breast cancer outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted and confirmed data and dual rated study quality; discrepancies were resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fair-quality evidence from a meta-analysis of mammography trials indicated relative risks (RRs) for breast cancer mortality of 0.92 for women aged 39 to 49 years (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.02) (9 trials; 3 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.86 for those aged 50 to 59 years (CI, 0.68 to 0.97) (7 trials; 8 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.67 for those aged 60 to 69 years (CI, 0.54 to 0.83) (5 trials; 21 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); and 0.80 for those aged 70 to 74 years (CI, 0.51 to 1.28) (3 trials; 13 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years). Risk reduction was 25% to 31% for women aged 50 to 69 years in observational studies of mammography screening. All-cause mortality was not reduced with screening. Advanced breast cancer was reduced for women aged 50 years or older (RR, 0.62 [CI, 0.46 to 0.83]) (3 trials) but not those aged 39 to 49 years (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.74 to 1.37]) (4 trials); less evidence supported this outcome. LIMITATIONS: Most trials used imaging technologies and treatments that are now outdated, and definitions of advanced breast cancer were heterogeneous. Studies of effectiveness based on risk factors, intervals, or other modalities were unavailable or methodologically limited.
CONCLUSION: Breast cancer mortality is generally reduced with mammography screening, although estimates are not statistically significant at all ages and the magnitudes of effect are small. Advanced cancer is reduced with screening for women aged 50 years or older. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26756588     DOI: 10.7326/M15-0969

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


  128 in total

Review 1.  Stress-induced EGF receptor signaling through STAT3 and tumor progression in triple-negative breast cancer.

Authors:  Nikolas Balanis; Cathleen R Carlin
Journal:  Mol Cell Endocrinol       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 4.102

2.  Differences in subtype distribution between screen-detected and symptomatic invasive breast cancer and their impact on survival.

Authors:  N Kobayashi; M Hikichi; K Ushimado; A Sugioka; Y Kiriyama; M Kuroda; T Utsumi
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 3.405

3.  Does patient age affect the PPV3 of ACR BI-RADS Ultrasound categories 4 and 5 in the diagnostic setting?

Authors:  Yue Hu; Yaping Yang; Ran Gu; Liang Jin; Shiyu Shen; Fengtao Liu; Hongli Wang; Jingsi Mei; Xiaofang Jiang; Qiang Liu; Fengxi Su
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 5.315

4.  In Reply.

Authors:  Achim Wöckel; Ute-Susann Albert; Ingrid Schreer; Wilfried Budach
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 5.594

5.  Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in women aged 40-74 years who are not at increased risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Scott Klarenbach; Nicki Sims-Jones; Gabriela Lewin; Harminder Singh; Guylène Thériault; Marcello Tonelli; Marion Doull; Susan Courage; Alejandra Jaramillo Garcia; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Universal late pregnancy ultrasound screening to predict adverse outcomes in nulliparous women: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Gordon Cs Smith; Alexandros A Moraitis; David Wastlund; Jim G Thornton; Aris Papageorghiou; Julia Sanders; Alexander Ep Heazell; Stephen C Robson; Ulla Sovio; Peter Brocklehurst; Edward Cf Wilson
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 4.014

Review 7.  Coronary Artery Calcium Score: the "Mammogram" of the Heart?

Authors:  Miguel Cainzos-Achirica; Philip A Di Carlo; Catherine E Handy; Renato Quispe; Gerard Roura; Xavier Pinto; Roger S Blumenthal; Josep Comin-Colet; Xavier Corbella; Michael J Blaha
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 2.931

8.  Breast cancer screening initiation after turning 40 years of age within the PROSPR consortium.

Authors:  Elisabeth F Beaber; Anna N A Tosteson; Jennifer S Haas; Tracy Onega; Brian L Sprague; Donald L Weaver; Anne Marie McCarthy; Chyke A Doubeni; Virginia P Quinn; Celette Sugg Skinner; Ann G Zauber; William E Barlow
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Multilevel Regression for Small-Area Estimation of Mammography Use in the United States, 2014.

Authors:  Zahava Berkowitz; Xingyou Zhang; Thomas B Richards; Susan A Sabatino; Lucy A Peipins; James Holt; Mary C White
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 10.  Risk-Reducing Options for Women with a Hereditary Breast Cancer Predisposition.

Authors:  Ismail Jatoi
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2018-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.