Literature DB >> 8105098

Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer.

S W Fletcher1, W Black, R Harris, B K Rimer, S Shapiro.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the past 30 years, eight major randomized controlled trials of breast cancer screening--with mammography and/or clinical breast examination--have been conducted. Results from several trials have been updated during the past year, and initial results of three other trials have been reported.
PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute held an International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer in February 1993 to conduct a thorough and objective critical review of the world's most recent clinical trial data on breast cancer screening, consider the new evidence, assess the current state of knowledge, and identify issues needing further research.
METHODS: Investigators representing the eight randomized controlled trials of breast cancer screening in women aged 40-74 presented published and unpublished data. Evidence relating to the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in different age groups, especially women aged 40-49, was presented.
RESULTS: For women aged 40-49, randomized controlled trials consistently demonstrated no benefit from screening in the first 5-7 years after study entry. A meta-analysis of six trials found a relative risk of 1.08 (95% confidence interval = 0.85-1.39) after 7 years' follow-up. After 10-12 years of follow-up, none of four trials have found a statistically significant benefit in mortality; a combined analysis of Swedish studies showed a statistically insignificant 13% decrease in mortality at 12 years. Only one trial (Health Insurance Plan) has data beyond 12 years of follow-up, and results show a 25% decrease in mortality at 10-18 years. Statistical significance of this result is disputed, however. In women aged 50-69, all studies show mortality reductions; three of four studies show reductions of about 30% at 10-12 years after study entry. Results from two of these trials were statistically significant. Too few women over age 70 have been included in studies for adequate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: For women aged 40-49, randomized controlled trials of breast cancer screening show no benefit 5-7 years after entry. At 10-12 years, benefit is uncertain and, if present, marginal; thereafter, it is unknown. For women aged 50-69, screening reduces breast cancer mortality by about a third. Currently available data for women age 70 or older are inadequate to judge the effectiveness of screening. IMPLICATIONS: Randomized trials have provided stronger scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of screening for breast cancer than for any other cancer. However, much still needs to be learned. Periodic gatherings of scientists in the field should speed the process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8105098     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/85.20.1644

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  101 in total

1.  Detection of breast cancer. Clinical breast examination is not an acceptable alternative to mammography.

Authors:  C J de Wolf
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-03-31

Review 2.  Breast cancer in Canada.

Authors: 
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Mammography in New Hampshire: characteristics of the women and the exams they receive.

Authors:  P A Carney; M E Goodrich; D M O'Mahony; A N Tosteson; M S Eliassen; S P Poplack; S Birnbaum; B G Harwood; K A Burgess; B T Berube; W S Wells; J P Ball; M M Stevens
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2000-06

4.  Predictors of mammography use among Canadian women aged 50-69: findings from the 1996/97 National Population Health Survey.

Authors:  C J Maxwell; C M Bancej; J Snider
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-02-06       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 5.  Is clinical breast examination an acceptable alternative to mammographic screening?

Authors:  I Mittra; M Baum; H Thornton; J Houghton
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-10-28

Review 6.  Should family physicians be teaching and encouraging women to perform regular breast self-examination?

Authors:  R Heisey; N Pimlott; M F Evans
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 3.275

7.  Improving the time to diagnosis after an abnormal screening mammogram.

Authors:  I A Olivotto; M J Borugian; L Kan; S R Harris; E J Rousseau; S E Thorne; J A Vestrup; C J Wright; A J Coldman; T G Hislop
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct

Review 8.  Clinical practice. Mammographic screening for breast cancer.

Authors:  Suzanne W Fletcher; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-04-24       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Outcomes of the Learn, Share & Live breast cancer education program for older urban women.

Authors:  C S Skinner; C L Arfken; B Waterman
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  Waiting for a diagnosis after an abnormal screening mammogram. SMPBC diagnostic process workgroup. Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia.

Authors:  I A Olivotto; L Kan; S King
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.