Anya Romanoff1,2, Tara Hayes Constant3, Kay M Johnson4,5, Manuel Cedano Guadiamos6, Ana María Burga Vega7, Joseph Zunt1, Benjamin O Anderson1,8,9. 1. Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle. 2. Department of Surgery, Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, New York. 3. Department of Anthropology, University of Washington, Seattle. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle. 5. Hospital and Specialty Medicine, Veterans Affairs Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington. 6. Department of Surgery, Instituto Regional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas del Norte, Trujillo, Peru. 7. Department of Epidemiology and Statistics, Instituto Regional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas del Norte, Trujillo, Peru. 8. Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle. 9. Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Mammographic screening is impractical in most of the world where breast cancers are first identified based on clinical signs and symptoms. Clinical breast examination may improve early diagnosis directly by finding breast cancers at earlier stages or indirectly by heightening women's awareness of breast health concerns. OBJECTIVE: To investigate factors that influence time to presentation and stage at diagnosis among patients with breast cancer to determine whether history of previous clinical breast examination is associated with earlier presentation and/or earlier cancer stage at diagnosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cross-sectional analysis of individual patient interviews using a validated Breast Cancer Delay Questionnaire, 113 (71.1%) of 159 women with breast cancer treated at a federally funded tertiary care referral cancer center in Trujillo, Peru, from February 1 through May 31, 2015, were studied. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Method of breast cancer detection and factors that influence time to and stage at diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 113 women with diagnosed cancer (mean [SD] age, 54 [10.8] years; age range, 32-82 years), 105 (92.9%) had self-detected disease. Of the 93 women for whom stage was documented, 45 (48.4%) were diagnosed with early-stage disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage 0, I, or II), and 48 (51.6%) were diagnosed with late-stage disease (AJCC stage III or IV). Mean (SD) total delay from symptom onset to initiation of treatment was 407 (665) days because of patient (mean [SD], 198 [449] days) and health care system (mean [SD], 241 [556] days) delay. Fifty-two women (46.0%) had a history of clinical breast examination, and 23 (20.4%) had undergone previous mammography. Women who underwent a previous clinical breast examination were more likely to have shorter delays from symptom development to presentation compared with women who had never undergone a previous clinical breast examination (odds ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.30-6.60; P = .01). Women diagnosed with shorter patient delay were more likely to be diagnosed with early-stage disease (AJCC stage 0, I, or II) than those with longer patient delay (31 [58.5%] vs 11 [30.6%], P = .01). Women who underwent a previous clinical breast examination were more likely to be diagnosed with early-stage disease compared with women who had never undergone previous clinical breast examination; this relationship remained significant after controlling for insurance and household income (odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.01-5.95; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a population in which most breast cancers are self-detected, previous clinical breast examination was associated with shorter patient delay and earlier stage at breast cancer diagnosis. In regions of the world that lack mammographic screening, the routine use of clinical breast examination may provide a resource-appropriate strategy for improving breast cancer early diagnosis.
IMPORTANCE: Mammographic screening is impractical in most of the world where breast cancers are first identified based on clinical signs and symptoms. Clinical breast examination may improve early diagnosis directly by finding breast cancers at earlier stages or indirectly by heightening women's awareness of breast health concerns. OBJECTIVE: To investigate factors that influence time to presentation and stage at diagnosis among patients with breast cancer to determine whether history of previous clinical breast examination is associated with earlier presentation and/or earlier cancer stage at diagnosis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cross-sectional analysis of individual patient interviews using a validated Breast Cancer Delay Questionnaire, 113 (71.1%) of 159 women with breast cancer treated at a federally funded tertiary care referral cancer center in Trujillo, Peru, from February 1 through May 31, 2015, were studied. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Method of breast cancer detection and factors that influence time to and stage at diagnosis. RESULTS: Of 113 women with diagnosed cancer (mean [SD] age, 54 [10.8] years; age range, 32-82 years), 105 (92.9%) had self-detected disease. Of the 93 women for whom stage was documented, 45 (48.4%) were diagnosed with early-stage disease (American Joint Committee on Cancer [AJCC] stage 0, I, or II), and 48 (51.6%) were diagnosed with late-stage disease (AJCC stage III or IV). Mean (SD) total delay from symptom onset to initiation of treatment was 407 (665) days because of patient (mean [SD], 198 [449] days) and health care system (mean [SD], 241 [556] days) delay. Fifty-two women (46.0%) had a history of clinical breast examination, and 23 (20.4%) had undergone previous mammography. Women who underwent a previous clinical breast examination were more likely to have shorter delays from symptom development to presentation compared with women who had never undergone a previous clinical breast examination (odds ratio, 2.92; 95% CI, 1.30-6.60; P = .01). Women diagnosed with shorter patient delay were more likely to be diagnosed with early-stage disease (AJCC stage 0, I, or II) than those with longer patient delay (31 [58.5%] vs 11 [30.6%], P = .01). Women who underwent a previous clinical breast examination were more likely to be diagnosed with early-stage disease compared with women who had never undergone previous clinical breast examination; this relationship remained significant after controlling for insurance and household income (odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.01-5.95; P = .048). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a population in which most breast cancers are self-detected, previous clinical breast examination was associated with shorter patient delay and earlier stage at breast cancer diagnosis. In regions of the world that lack mammographic screening, the routine use of clinical breast examination may provide a resource-appropriate strategy for improving breast cancer early diagnosis.
Authors: Benjamin O Anderson; Cheng-Har Yip; Robert A Smith; Roman Shyyan; Stephen F Sener; Alexandru Eniu; Robert W Carlson; Edward Azavedo; Joe Harford Journal: Cancer Date: 2008-10-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Kevin C Oeffinger; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ruth Etzioni; Abbe Herzig; James S Michaelson; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Louise C Walter; Timothy R Church; Christopher R Flowers; Samuel J LaMonte; Andrew M D Wolf; Carol DeSantis; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Kimberly Andrews; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Debbie Saslow; Robert A Smith; Otis W Brawley; Richard Wender Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-10-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sten G Zelle; Tatiana Vidaurre; Julio E Abugattas; Javier E Manrique; Gustavo Sarria; José Jeronimo; Janice N Seinfeld; Jeremy A Lauer; Cecilia R Sepulveda; Diego Venegas; Rob Baltussen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ophira Ginsburg; Cheng-Har Yip; Ari Brooks; Anna Cabanes; Maira Caleffi; Jorge Antonio Dunstan Yataco; Bishal Gyawali; Valerie McCormack; Myrna McLaughlin de Anderson; Ravi Mehrotra; Alejandro Mohar; Raul Murillo; Lydia E Pace; Electra D Paskett; Anya Romanoff; Anne F Rositch; John R Scheel; Miriam Schneidman; Karla Unger-Saldaña; Verna Vanderpuye; Tsu-Yin Wu; Safina Yuma; Allison Dvaladze; Catherine Duggan; Benjamin O Anderson Journal: Cancer Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Joseph A Pinto; Luis Pinillos; Cynthia Villarreal-Garza; Zaida Morante; Manuel V Villarán; Gerson Mejía; Christian Caglevic; Alfredo Aguilar; Williams Fajardo; Franz Usuga; Marcia Carrasco; Pamela Rebaza; Ana M Posada; Indira Tirado-Hurtado; Claudio Flores; Carlos S Vallejos Journal: Ecancermedicalscience Date: 2019-01-22
Authors: Julie M Clanahan; Sanjana Reddy; Robyn B Broach; Anne F Rositch; Benjamin O Anderson; E Paul Wileyto; Brian S Englander; Ari D Brooks Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2020-02
Authors: Michael Dykstra; Brighid Malone; Onica Lekuntwane; Jason Efstathiou; Virginia Letsatsi; Shekinah Elmore; Cesar Castro; Neo Tapela; Scott Dryden-Peterson Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2021-01
Authors: Fiona McKenzie; Annelle Zietsman; Moses Galukande; Angelica Anele; Charles Adisa; Groesbeck Parham; Leeya Pinder; Herbert Cubasch; Maureen Joffe; Frederick Kidaaga; Robert Lukande; Awa U Offiah; Ralph O Egejuru; Aaron Shibemba; Joachim Schuz; Benjamin O Anderson; Isabel Dos Santos Silva; Valerie McCormack Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2017-12-23 Impact factor: 7.396