Literature DB >> 3532183

Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies.

M Moskowitz.   

Abstract

In an earlier work, the author and colleagues predicted that the lead time gained by mammographic screening of an asymptomatic, randomly selected population of women was 2 years +/- 0.5 for women aged 35-49 years and 3.5 years +/- 0.5 for those over age 50. At the completion of long-term follow-up of 10,530 women (with a total of 111,087 "person years"), the resultant lead time actually gained seems to be 12-24 months for women aged 35-49 years at entry and 3.5-4 years for older women. Failure to take this lead time into account in the design of controlled trials may well result in failure to decrease mortality due to breast cancer. The results of the present study and those of recent Dutch and Swedish trials suggest that the most effective screening strategy may be annual mammographic and clinical examinations for women aged 40-49 years and biennial examinations thereafter.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3532183     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.161.1.3532183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  16 in total

1.  Long term breast cancer screening in Nijmegen, The Netherlands: the nine rounds from 1975-92.

Authors:  J D Otten; J A van Dijck; P G Peer; H Straatman; A L Verbeek; M Mravunac; J H Hendriks; R Holland
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Rate of over-diagnosis of breast cancer 15 years after end of Malmö mammographic screening trial: follow-up study.

Authors:  Sophia Zackrisson; Ingvar Andersson; Lars Janzon; Jonas Manjer; Jens Peter Garne
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-03-03

3.  Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammography.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  More misinformation on breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2017-02

5.  Age specific sensitivity and sojourn time in a breast cancer screening programme (DOM) in The Netherlands: a comparison of different methods.

Authors:  C T Brekelmans; P Westers; J A Faber; P H Peeters; H J Collette
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 3.710

6.  Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  P G Peer; A L Verbeek; H Straatman; J H Hendriks; R Holland
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  Differences in the quality of care for women with an abnormal mammogram or breast complaint.

Authors:  J S Haas; E F Cook; A L Puopolo; H R Burstin; T A Brennan
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk.

Authors:  Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Diana L Miglioretti; Natasha K Stout; Sandra J Lee; Clyde B Schechter; Diana S M Buist; Hui Huang; Eveline A M Heijnsdijk; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Oguzhan Alagoz; Aimee M Near; Karla Kerlikowske; Heidi D Nelson; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Development of a Bayesian classifier for breast cancer risk stratification: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Alexander Stojadinovic; Christina Eberhardt; Leonard Henry; John Eberhardt; Eric A Elster; George E Peoples; Aviram Nissan; Craig D Shriver
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2010-03-29

10.  Breast cancer screening, with particular reference to the concept of 'high risk' groups.

Authors:  F De Waard; H J Collette; J J Rombach; C Collette
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 4.872

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.