Francys C Verdial1, Ruth Etzioni2, Catherine Duggan2, Benjamin O Anderson1,3,4. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. 2. Program in Epidemiology, Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 3. Breast Health Global Initiative, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 4. Department of Global Health-Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast cancer incidence and mortality are influenced by early-detection methods, including mammographic screening. Demographic changes in US statistics serve as a model for changes that can be anticipated in countries where mammographic screening has not been implemented. METHODS: SEER statistics (1973-2013) for breast cancer mortality, incidence, stage at diagnosis, and age at diagnosis were examined. Temporal associations between screening changes and breast cancer demographics in the US were documented. FINDINGS: Before 1982 (pre-screening), breast cancer incidence in the US remained stable, with similar incidence of localized and regional cancers, and with in-situ disease comprising <2% of diagnosed disease.1 During the transitional phase of mammographic screening, breast cancer incidence increased. In 1991, breast cancer age-adjusted mortality rates began decreasing and have continued to decrease. In the post-screening phase, stage distribution stabilized, but now with localized and in-situ disease representing the majority of diagnosed cases. The median age at diagnosis has increased to 61 years. DISCUSSION: Mammographic screening increases breast cancer incidence, shifts the stage distribution toward earlier stage disease, and in high-income countries, is associated with improved survival. Whether similar improvement in breast cancer survival can be achieved in the absence of mammographic screening has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.
BACKGROUND:Breast cancer incidence and mortality are influenced by early-detection methods, including mammographic screening. Demographic changes in US statistics serve as a model for changes that can be anticipated in countries where mammographic screening has not been implemented. METHODS: SEER statistics (1973-2013) for breast cancer mortality, incidence, stage at diagnosis, and age at diagnosis were examined. Temporal associations between screening changes and breast cancer demographics in the US were documented. FINDINGS: Before 1982 (pre-screening), breast cancer incidence in the US remained stable, with similar incidence of localized and regional cancers, and with in-situ disease comprising <2% of diagnosed disease.1 During the transitional phase of mammographic screening, breast cancer incidence increased. In 1991, breast cancer age-adjusted mortality rates began decreasing and have continued to decrease. In the post-screening phase, stage distribution stabilized, but now with localized and in-situ disease representing the majority of diagnosed cases. The median age at diagnosis has increased to 61 years. DISCUSSION: Mammographic screening increases breast cancer incidence, shifts the stage distribution toward earlier stage disease, and in high-income countries, is associated with improved survival. Whether similar improvement in breast cancer survival can be achieved in the absence of mammographic screening has yet to be conclusively demonstrated.
Authors: Paul E Goss; Brittany L Lee; Tanja Badovinac-Crnjevic; Kathrin Strasser-Weippl; Yanin Chavarri-Guerra; Jessica St Louis; Cynthia Villarreal-Garza; Karla Unger-Saldaña; Mayra Ferreyra; Márcio Debiasi; Pedro E R Liedke; Diego Touya; Gustavo Werutsky; Michaela Higgins; Lei Fan; Claudia Vasconcelos; Eduardo Cazap; Carlos Vallejos; Alejandro Mohar; Felicia Knaul; Hector Arreola; Rekha Batura; Silvana Luciani; Richard Sullivan; Dianne Finkelstein; Sergio Simon; Carlos Barrios; Rebecca Kightlinger; Andres Gelrud; Vladimir Bychkovsky; Gilberto Lopes; Stephen Stefani; Marcelo Blaya; Fabiano Hahn Souza; Franklin Santana Santos; Alberto Kaemmerer; Evandro de Azambuja; Andres Felipe Cardona Zorilla; Raul Murillo; Jose Jeronimo; Vivien Tsu; Andre Carvalho; Carlos Ferreira Gil; Cinthya Sternberg; Alfonso Dueñas-Gonzalez; Dennis Sgroi; Mauricio Cuello; Rodrigo Fresco; Rui Manuel Reis; Guiseppe Masera; Raúl Gabús; Raul Ribeiro; Renata Knust; Gustavo Ismael; Eduardo Rosenblatt; Berta Roth; Luisa Villa; Argelia Lara Solares; Marta Ximena Leon; Isabel Torres-Vigil; Alfredo Covarrubias-Gomez; Andrés Hernández; Mariela Bertolino; Gilberto Schwartsmann; Sergio Santillana; Francisco Esteva; Luis Fein; Max Mano; Henry Gomez; Marc Hurlbert; Alessandra Durstine; Gustavo Azenha Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Carol E DeSantis; Stacey A Fedewa; Ann Goding Sauer; Joan L Kramer; Robert A Smith; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Carol E DeSantis; Freddie Bray; Jacques Ferlay; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Benjamin O Anderson; Ahmedin Jemal Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2015-09-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Marit Valla; Lars Johan Vatten; Monica Jernberg Engstrøm; Olav Anton Haugen; Lars Andreas Akslen; Johan Håkon Bjørngaard; Anne Irene Hagen; Borgny Ytterhus; Anna Mary Bofin; Signe Opdahl Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-09-26 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Lee R Mobley; Florence K L Tangka; Zahava Berkowitz; Jacqueline Miller; Ingrid J Hall; Manxia Wu; Susan A Sabatino Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2021-04-29 Impact factor: 3.017