Literature DB >> 9412284

Using autopsy series to estimate the disease "reservoir" for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: how much more breast cancer can we find?

H G Welch1, W C Black.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine how many cases of breast cancer might be found if women not known to have the disease were thoroughly examined (the disease "reservoir"). DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE search from 1966 to the present. STUDY SELECTION: Hospital-based and forensic autopsy series examining women not known to have had breast cancer during life. DATA EXTRACTION: Observed prevalence of occult invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in which the number of women who were given a diagnosis was the numerator and the number of women examined was the denominator. For each autopsy series, we attempted to ascertain the level of scrutiny (sampling method, number of slides examined) given to the pathologic specimens. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among seven autopsy series of women not known to have had breast cancer during life, the median prevalence of invasive breast cancer was 1.3% (range, 0% to 1.8%) and the median prevalence of DCIS was 8.9% (range, 0% to 14.7%). Prevalences were higher among women likely to have been screened (that is, women 40 to 70 years of age). The mean number of slides examined per breast ranged from 9 to 275; series that reported higher levels of scrutiny tended to discover more cases of cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: A substantial reservoir of DCIS is undetected during life. How hard pathologists look for the disease and, perhaps, their threshold for making the diagnosis are potentially important factors in determining how many cases of DCIS are diagnosed. The latter has important implications for what it means to have the disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9412284     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-11-199712010-00014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  78 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  An investigation of the apparent breast cancer epidemic in France: screening and incidence trends in birth cohorts.

Authors:  Bernard Junod; Per-Henrik Zahl; Robert M Kaplan; Jørn Olsen; Sander Greenland
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 4.430

Review 3.  The significance of quality of life in health care.

Authors:  Robert M Kaplan
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  The LNT Debate in Radiation Protection: Science vs. Policy.

Authors:  Kenneth L Mossman
Journal:  Dose Response       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 2.658

5.  The clinical, research, and social value of autopsy after any cancer death: a perspective from the Children's Oncology Group Soft Tissue Sarcoma Committee.

Authors:  Sheri L Spunt; Sara O Vargas; Cheryl M Coffin; Stephen X Skapek; David M Parham; Joan Darling; Douglas S Hawkins; Charles Keller
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Content of invitations for publicly funded screening mammography.

Authors:  Karsten Juhl Jørgensen; Peter C Gøtzsche
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2006-03-04

Review 7.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review.

Authors:  M G Marmot; D G Altman; D A Cameron; J A Dewar; S G Thompson; M Wilcox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 7.640

8.  What is the sensitivity of mammography and dynamic MR imaging for DCIS if the whole-breast histopathology is used as a reference standard?

Authors:  F Sardanelli; L Bacigalupo; L Carbonaro; A Esseridou; G M Giuseppetti; P Panizza; V Lattanzio; A Del Maschio
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2008-07-09       Impact factor: 3.469

9.  Imaging studies for the early detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  Sylvia H Heywang-Köbrunner; Ingrid Schreer; Walter Heindel; Alexander Katalinic
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2008-08-04       Impact factor: 5.594

10.  The overdiagnosis nightmare: a time for caution.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 2.809

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.