Literature DB >> 8433312

Evaluating the breast screening programme: the need for surgical audit.

F Kee1, D Gorman, W Odling-Smee.   

Abstract

It is to be anticipated that a reduction in population mortality attributable to mammographic screening would be heralded by an increasing proportion of breast cancer cases diagnosed at earlier stages and by an improvement in case fatality. Few cancer registers routinely produce incidence or survival data by stage at diagnosis and thus improvement in these will be the harder to assess. By thorough casenote review and follow up, this study has determined the usual presentation and survival of breast cancer in Northern Ireland in 1986 before the introduction of screening. Overall, 85% of cases were Manchester stage I or II, figures which accord with other British studies. Five-year survival ranged from 77.8% for stage I (95% confidence limits 71.7%, 82.7%) to 35.7% for stage IV (95% confidence limits 13.0%, 59.4%). Forty-three per cent of cases treated in non-teaching hospitals could not be pathologically staged, more than twice the figure for teaching hospitals (Chi-squared = 15.7, df = 1, P < 0.001). Since many tumours not detected by screening will be treated outside teaching centres, this difference will reduce the statistical power to detect the true shift in stage distribution and improvement in survival from screening. Comprehensive surgical audit would help to resolve the inadequacies in existing data collection and improve the ability to evaluate the outcome of the screening programme.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8433312      PMCID: PMC1293854     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J R Soc Med        ISSN: 0141-0768            Impact factor:   5.344


  12 in total

1.  Adjuvant treatment in breast cancer.

Authors:  H Goodare
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1992-02-15       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Stage-shift cancer screening model.

Authors:  R J Connor; K C Chu; C R Smart
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Axillary dissection in breast cancer.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1991-02-23       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Prognosis in breast cancer: the relevance of clinical staging.

Authors:  A O Langlands; G R Kerr
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1978-11       Impact factor: 2.350

5.  Early indicators of efficacy of breast cancer screening programmes. Results of the Florence District Programme.

Authors:  E Paci; S Ciatto; E Buiatti; S Cecchini; D Palli; M Rosselli del Turco
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1990-08-15       Impact factor: 7.396

6.  Confidence intervals and interval cancers ... needles and haystacks?

Authors:  F Kee; D Gorman; W Odling-Smee
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  1992-01       Impact factor: 2.427

7.  An analysis of survival differences between clinically and screen-detected cancer patients.

Authors:  J D Habbema; G J van Oortmarssen; D J van Putten
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  1983 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.373

8.  Breast cancer data collection for surgical audit.

Authors:  W G Woods; R J Earlam
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 9.  The 1989 Walter Hubert lecture. Does biological understanding influence surgical practice?

Authors:  R Blamey
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Comparative pathology of breast cancer in a randomised trial of screening.

Authors:  T J Anderson; J Lamb; P Donnan; F E Alexander; A Huggins; B B Muir; A E Kirkpatrick; U Chetty; W Hepburn; A Smith
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 7.640

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.