Literature DB >> 8004592

Screening: assessment of current studies.

S Shapiro1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A major issue in decisions regarding screening women for breast cancer concerns ages of coverage, in particular, whether routine mass screening programs with mammography should cover women aged 40-49. Interpretation of results of studies on this question is affected by differences in design, adequacy of sample size, quality of mammography, period of follow-up, and other methodologic and content issues.
METHODS: Experience in eight randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted over the past 30 years in the United States, Europe, and Canada were assessed, and problems influencing their conclusions were considered.
RESULTS: The age groups studied in these RCTs varied, from 40-64 in the Health Insurance Plan (HIP) study to 40-74 in the Swedish two-country trials. In addition, they differed in periodicity and modalities of screening, with the HIP and the Canadian National Breast Screening Study providing annual examinations with mammography and clinical breast examination, and most of the other trials scheduling longer intervals between examinations with mammography alone. Great consistency is found, however, in the results for women aged 50-69, as all of these studies showed a reduction in breast cancer mortality in this age group, suggesting about a 30% decrease. For women aged 40-49, the studies showed no benefit 5-7 years after entry and an uncertain benefit 10-12 years after entry, and only one study offered information on long term effects. Additional follow-up is needed. Adequate data are not available for women 70 and older.
CONCLUSION: Public health policy on mass screening with mammography for women aged 40-49 is questionable. At this time, the emphasis should be on physicians advising women about the uncertainty of the benefits of routine mammography when referrals are being considered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8004592     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.2820741306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  10 in total

1.  Desiderata for personal electronic communication in clinical systems.

Authors:  Indra Neil Sarkar; Justin Starren
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Breast cancer screening panels continue to confuse the facts and inject their own biases.

Authors:  D B Kopans
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.677

3.  Intraoperative ultrasound-guided excision of nonpalpable breast lesions.

Authors:  I C Bennett; J Greenslade; H Chiam
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  A model building exercise of mortality risk for Taiwanese women with breast cancer.

Authors:  Tsai W Chang; Yao L Kuo
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-08-19       Impact factor: 2.796

5.  Breast cancer screening: are we seeing the benefit?

Authors:  Donella Puliti; Marco Zappa
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2012-09-20       Impact factor: 8.775

6.  Image quality and artifacts in automated breast ultrasonography.

Authors:  Sung Hun Kim
Journal:  Ultrasonography       Date:  2018-07-14

7.  Female medical students' awareness, attitudes, and knowledge about early detection of breast cancer in Syrian Private University, Syria.

Authors:  Abdullah Omar; Aliaa Bakr; Nazir Ibrahim
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2020-04-24

Review 8.  Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

Authors:  Peter C Gøtzsche; Karsten Juhl Jørgensen
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2013-06-04

9.  Comparison of false negative rates among breast cancer screening modalities with or without mammography: Miyagi trial.

Authors:  N Ohuchi; K Yoshida; M Kimura; A Ouchi; K Shiiba; K Ohnuki; A Fukao; R Abe; S Matsuno; S Mori
Journal:  Jpn J Cancer Res       Date:  1995-05

10.  Usefulness of ultrasonography combined with conventional physical examination in mass screening for breast cancer: a retrospective study of Yamanashi Health Care Center results from 1989 to 1994.

Authors:  H Okamoto; T Ogawara; F Arihara; K Kobayashi; S Inoue; K Nagahori; M Yamamoto; T Sekikawa; Y Matsumoto
Journal:  Jpn J Cancer Res       Date:  1996-03
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.