Literature DB >> 9709274

Recent results from the Swedish Two-County Trial: the effects of age, histologic type, and mode of detection on the efficacy of breast cancer screening.

L Tabár1, H H Chen, G Fagerberg, S W Duffy, T C Smith.   

Abstract

The effect of mammographic screening in reducing mortality from breast cancer is known to be smaller and more delayed in women aged 40-49 than in women over 50. In this study, we investigated how these phenomena relate to histology-specific breast cancer incidence and mortality. The data are from 2,468 women with breast cancer who participated in the Swedish Two-County Trial. The overall relative breast cancer mortality of invited to noninvited women aged 40-49 was 0.87, and the relative mortality from poorly differentiated (grade 3) ductal carcinoma was 0.95. These results were not statistically significant. The corresponding relative risks for invited women aged 50-74 were a statistically significant 0.65 and 0.61. We conclude that in this trial, with a two-year interscreening interval, the smaller and later effect of invitation to screening on breast cancer mortality in women 40-49 years old is due to the failure of screening to reduce mortality from grade 3 ductal carcinoma in this age group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9709274     DOI: 10.1093/jncimono/1997.22.43

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr        ISSN: 1052-6773


  10 in total

Review 1.  Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40-49 years at average risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  J Ringash
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-02-20       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Young age is not associated with increased local recurrence for DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery and radiation.

Authors:  Aruna Turaka; Gary M Freedman; Tianyu Li; Penny R Anderson; Ramona Swaby; Nicos Nicolaou; Lori Goldstein; Elin R Sigurdson; Richard J Bleicher
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-07-01       Impact factor: 3.454

3.  Classification of breast computed tomography data.

Authors:  Thomas R Nelson; Laura I Cerviño; John M Boone; Karen K Lindfors
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-03       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Why Was the US Preventive Services Task Force's 2009 Breast Cancer Screening Recommendation So Objectionable? A Historical Analysis.

Authors:  Barron H Lerner; Graham Curtiss-Rowlands
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Development of a Bayesian classifier for breast cancer risk stratification: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Alexander Stojadinovic; Christina Eberhardt; Leonard Henry; John Eberhardt; Eric A Elster; George E Peoples; Aviram Nissan; Craig D Shriver
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2010-03-29

6.  Do physicians tailor their recommendations for breast cancer risk reduction based on patient's risk?

Authors:  Jennifer S Haas; Celia P Kaplan; Steven E Gregorich; Eliseo J Pérez-Stable; Genevieve Des Jarlais
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Consensus recommendations for advancing breast cancer: risk identification and screening in ethnically diverse younger women.

Authors:  Alexander Stojadinovic; Thomas A Summers; John Eberhardt; Albert Cerussi; Warren Grundfest; Charles M Peterson; Michael Brazaitis; Elizabeth Krupinski; Harold Freeman
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2011-04-20       Impact factor: 4.207

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.  Rational and irrational issues in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Cornelia J Baines
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2011-01-11       Impact factor: 6.639

10.  Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality (UK Age trial): final results of a randomised, controlled trial.

Authors:  Stephen W Duffy; Daniel Vulkan; Howard Cuckle; Dharmishta Parmar; Shama Sheikh; Robert A Smith; Andrew Evans; Oleg Blyuss; Louise Johns; Ian O Ellis; Jonathan Myles; Peter D Sasieni; Sue M Moss
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 41.316

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.