Literature DB >> 35931900

Associated morbidity in screened and diagnosed breast cancer patients: a retrospective study.

Diane Bula-Ibula1,2, Birgit Carly3, Serge Rozenberg3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer (BC) screening has been associated with reduced mortality and morbidity. This study compares tumor characteristics and treatment morbidity in screened versus diagnosed women.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study, conducted between 2010 and 2013, included 666 BC screened or diagnosed patients. We compared patients and tumors characteristics and received treatments. We also analyzed the results after excluding patients at risk of BC and conducted a multivariate analysis to assess odds ratios (OR).
RESULTS: Screened women had smaller tumors (16,5 vs 22,6 mm, p < 0.001), of lower grade (p < 0.001) with a lower proliferation index (PI) (p < 0.001) than diagnosed women. Screened women were more frequently treated using conservative surgery (82.8% vs 59.7%, p < 0.001), needed less often axillary dissection (15.1% vs 35.4%, p < 0.001) and less often chemotherapy (20.8% vs 48.3% p < 0.001) than diagnosed women. In the multivariate analysis after adjustment for age and BC history, diagnosed women had increased (OR: 4.79, 95% IC: 3.19-7,18) risk to be administered chemotherapy and to undergo axillary dissection (OR: 4.18, 95% IC: 1.56-11.17) than screened women.
CONCLUSION: Patients should be informed about the benefits in terms of morbidity that screening confers to them.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast cancer; Morbidity; Screening, diagnosis; Treatment

Year:  2022        PMID: 35931900     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-022-06630-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.493


  7 in total

Review 1.  Breast cancer screening in the older woman: an effective way to reduce mortality?

Authors:  M Paesmans; L Ameye; M Moreau; S Rozenberg
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  What can be done to encourage women from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds to attend breast screening? A qualitative synthesis of barriers and facilitators.

Authors:  J Baird; G Yogeswaran; G Oni; E E Wilson
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 2.427

3.  Self-selection for mammography screening according to use of hormone replacement therapy: A systematic literature review.

Authors:  Miriam Heinig; Sarina Schwarz; Ulrike Haug
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol       Date:  2021-02-16       Impact factor: 2.984

4.  Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue.

Authors:  Marije F Bakker; Stéphanie V de Lange; Ruud M Pijnappel; Ritse M Mann; Petra H M Peeters; Evelyn M Monninkhof; Marleen J Emaus; Claudette E Loo; Robertus H C Bisschops; Marc B I Lobbes; Matthijn D F de Jong; Katya M Duvivier; Jeroen Veltman; Nico Karssemeijer; Harry J de Koning; Paul J van Diest; Willem P T M Mali; Maurice A A J van den Bosch; Wouter B Veldhuis; Carla H van Gils
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  EMAS position statement: individualized breast cancer screening versus population-based mammography screening programmes.

Authors:  Herman Depypere; Joelle Desreux; Faustino R Pérez-López; Iuliana Ceausu; C Tamer Erel; Irene Lambrinoudaki; Karin Schenck-Gustafsson; Yvonne T van der Schouw; Tommaso Simoncini; Florence Tremollieres; Margaret Rees
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 6.  Discussing the benefits and harms of screening mammography.

Authors:  Meagan Brennan; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 7.  Vaccines for preventing infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis..

Authors:  Helle Krogh Johansen; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-17
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.