-
Annals of Internal Medicine Nov 2009This systematic review is an update of evidence since the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on breast cancer screening. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review is an update of evidence since the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on breast cancer screening.
PURPOSE
To determine the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years and 70 years or older, the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination, and the harms of screening.
DATA SOURCES
Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through the fourth quarter of 2008), MEDLINE (January 2001 to December 2008), reference lists, and Web of Science searches for published studies and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium for screening mammography data.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized, controlled trials with breast cancer mortality outcomes for screening effectiveness, and studies of various designs and multiple data sources for harms.
DATA EXTRACTION
Relevant data were abstracted, and study quality was rated by using established criteria.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% for women aged 39 to 49 years (relative risk, 0.85 [95% credible interval, 0.75 to 0.96]; 8 trials). Data are lacking for women aged 70 years or older. Radiation exposure from mammography is low. Patient adverse experiences are common and transient and do not affect screening practices. Estimates of overdiagnosis vary from 1% to 10%. Younger women have more false-positive mammography results and additional imaging but fewer biopsies than older women. Trials of clinical breast examination are ongoing; trials for breast self-examination showed no reductions in mortality but increases in benign biopsy results.
LIMITATION
Studies of older women, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging are lacking.
CONCLUSION
Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality for women aged 39 to 69 years; data are insufficient for older women. False-positive mammography results and additional imaging are common. No benefit has been shown for clinical breast examination or breast self-examination.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Anxiety; Breast Neoplasms; Breast Self-Examination; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Health Care Costs; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Mammography; Mass Screening; Middle Aged; Palpation; Risk Factors
PubMed: 19920273
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-10-200911170-00009 -
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &... May 2012Obesity is associated with increased colon cancer mortality and lower rates of mammography and Pap testing. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Obesity is associated with increased colon cancer mortality and lower rates of mammography and Pap testing.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review to determine whether obesity is associated with lower rates of colon cancer screening. We searched the PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. Two investigators reviewed citations, abstracts, and articles independently. Two investigators abstracted study information sequentially and evaluated quality independently using standardized forms. We included all studies in our qualitative syntheses. We used random effects meta-analyses to combine those studies providing screening results by the following body mass index (BMI) categories: Normal, 18.5-24.9 kg/m(2) (reference); overweight, 25-29.9 kg/m(2); class I obesity, 30-34.9 kg/m(2); class II obesity, 35-39.9 kg/m(2); and class III obesity, ≥ 40 kg/m(2).
RESULTS
Of 5,543 citations, we included 23 articles. Almost all studies were cross-sectional and ascertained BMI and screening through self-report. BMI was not associated with colon cancer screening overall. The subgroup of obese white women reported lower rates of colon cancer screening compared with those with a normal BMI with combined ORs (95% CI) of 0.87 (0.82-0.93), 0.80 (0.65-0.99), and 0.73 (0.58-0.94) for class I, II, and III obesity, respectively. Results were similar among white men with class II obesity.
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, BMI was not associated with colon cancer screening. Obese white men and women may be less likely to undergo colon cancer screening compared with those with a normal BMI.
IMPACT
Further investigation of this disparity may reduce the risk of obesity-related colon cancer death.
Topics: Body Mass Index; Colonic Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Male; Mass Screening; Obesity; Sex Factors; United States; White People
PubMed: 22492832
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-11-0826 -
Danish Medical Journal Apr 2013The rationale for breast cancer screening with mammography is deceptively simple: catch it early and reduce mortality from the disease and the need for mastectomies. But... (Review)
Review
The rationale for breast cancer screening with mammography is deceptively simple: catch it early and reduce mortality from the disease and the need for mastectomies. But breast cancer is a complex problem, and complex problems rarely have simple solutions. Breast screening brings forward the time of diagnosis only slightly compared to the lifetime of a tumour, and screen-detected tumours have a size where metastases are possible. A key question is if screening can prevent metastases, and if the screen-detected tumours are small enough to allow breast conserving surgery rather than mastectomy. A mortality reduction can never justify a medical intervention in its own right, but must be weighed against the harms. Overdiagnosis is the most important harm of breast screening, but has gained wider recognition only in recent years. Screening leads to the detection and treatment of breast cancers that would otherwise never have been detected because they grow very slowly or not at all and would not have been detected in the woman's lifetime in the absence of screening. Screening therefore turns women into cancer patients unnecessarily, with life-long physical and psychological harms. The debate about the justification of breast screening is therefore not a simple question of whether screening reduces breast cancer mortality. This dissertation quantifies the primary benefits and harms of screening mammography. Denmark has an unscreened "control group" because only two geographical regions offered screening over a long time-period, which is unique in an international context. This was used to study breast cancer mortality, overdiagnosis, and the use of mastectomies. Also, a systematic review of overdiagnosis in five other countries allowed us to show that about half of the screen-detected breast cancers are overdiagnosed. An effect on breast cancer mortality is doubtful in today's setting, and overdiagnosis causes an increase in the use of mastectomies. These findings are discussed in the context of tumour biology and stage at diagnosis. The information provided to women in invitations and on the Internet exaggerates benefits, participation is directly recommended, and the harms are downplayed or left out, despite agreement that the objective is informed choice. This raises an ethical discussion concerning autonomy versus paternalism, and the difficulty in weighing benefits against harms. Finally, financial, political, and professional conflicts of interest are discussed, as well as health economics.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Conflict of Interest; Decision Making; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Humans; Mammography; Mastectomy; Neoplasm Metastasis; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 23651722
DOI: No ID Found -
Evidence Report/technology Assessment Jun 2009To conduct a systematic review of the evidence on characteristics of community health workers (CHWs) and CHW interventions, outcomes of such interventions, costs and... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To conduct a systematic review of the evidence on characteristics of community health workers (CHWs) and CHW interventions, outcomes of such interventions, costs and cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions, and characteristics of CHW training.
DATA SOURCES
We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Collaboration resources, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature for studies published in English from 1980 through November 2008.
REVIEW METHODS
We used standard Evidence-based Practice Center methods of dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, abstractions, quality ratings, and strength of evidence grades. We resolved disagreements by consensus.
RESULTS
We included 53 studies on characteristics and outcomes of CHW interventions, 6 on cost-effectiveness, and 9 on training. CHWs interacted with participants in a broad array of locations, using a spectrum of materials at varying levels of intensity. We classified 8 studies as low intensity, 18 as moderate intensity, and 27 as high intensity, based on the type and duration of interaction. Regarding outcomes, limited evidence (five studies) suggests that CHW interventions can improve participant knowledge when compared with alternative approaches such as no intervention, media, mail, or usual care plus pamphlets. We found mixed evidence for CHW effectiveness on participant behavior change (22 studies) and health outcomes (27 studies): some studies suggested that CHW interventions can result in greater improvements in participant behavior and health outcomes when compared with various alternatives, but other studies suggested that CHW interventions provide no statistically different benefits than alternatives. Low or moderate strength of evidence suggests that CHWs can increase appropriate health care utilization for some interventions (30 studies). The literature showed mixed results of effectiveness when analyzed by clinical context: CHW interventions had the greatest effectiveness relative to alternatives for some disease prevention, asthma management, cervical cancer screening, and mammography screening outcomes. CHW interventions were not significantly different from alternatives for clinical breast examination, breast self-examination, colorectal cancer screening, chronic disease management, or most maternal and child health interventions. Six studies with economic and cost information yielded insufficient data to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions relative to other community health interventions. Limited evidence described characteristics of CHW training; no studies examined the impact of CHW training on health outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
CHWs can serve as a means of improving outcomes for underserved populations for some health conditions. The effectiveness of CHWs in numerous areas requires further research that addresses the methodological limitations of prior studies and that contributes to translating research into practice.
Topics: Community Health Services; Health Personnel; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; United States
PubMed: 20804230
DOI: No ID Found -
Health Technology Assessment... Sep 2011Following primary breast cancer treatment, the early detection of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) or ipsilateral secondary cancer in the treated breast and... (Review)
Review
The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different surveillance mammography regimens after the treatment for primary breast cancer: systematic reviews registry database analyses and economic evaluation.
BACKGROUND
Following primary breast cancer treatment, the early detection of ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) or ipsilateral secondary cancer in the treated breast and detection of new primary cancers in the contralateral breast is beneficial for survival. Surveillance mammography is used to detect these cancers, but the optimal frequency of surveillance and the length of follow-up are unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To identify feasible management strategies for surveillance and follow-up of women after treatment for primary breast cancer in a UK setting, and to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of differing regimens.
METHODS
A survey of UK breast surgeons and radiologists to identify current surveillance mammography regimens and inform feasible alternatives; two discrete systematic reviews of evidence published from 1990 to mid 2009 to determine (i) the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of differing surveillance mammography regimens for patient health outcomes and (ii) the test performance of surveillance mammography in the detection of IBTR and metachronous contralateral breast cancer (MCBC); statistical analysis of individual patient data (West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit Breast Cancer Registry and Edinburgh data sets); and economic modelling using the systematic reviews results, existing data sets, and focused searches for specific data analysis to determine the effectiveness and cost-utility of differing surveillance regimens.
RESULTS
The majority of survey respondents initiate surveillance mammography 12 months after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) (87%) or mastectomy (79%). Annual surveillance mammography was most commonly reported for women after BCS or after mastectomy (72% and 53%, respectively). Most (74%) discharge women from surveillance mammography, most frequently 10 years after surgery. The majority (82%) discharge from clinical follow-up, most frequently at 5 years. Combining initiation, frequency and duration of surveillance mammography resulted in 54 differing surveillance regimens for women after BCS and 56 for women following mastectomy. The eight studies included in the clinical effectiveness systematic review suggest surveillance mammography offers a survival benefit compared with a surveillance regimen that does not include surveillance mammography. Nine studies were included in the test performance systematic review. For routine IBTR detection, surveillance mammography sensitivity ranged from 64% to 67% and specificity ranged from 85% to 97%. For magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), sensitivity ranged from 86% to 100% and specificity was 93%. For non-routine IBTR detection, sensitivity and specificity for surveillance mammography ranged from 50% to 83% and from 57% to 75%, respectively, and for MRI from 93% to 100% and from 88% to 96%, respectively. For routine MCBC detection, one study reported sensitivity of 67% and specificity of 50% for both surveillance mammography and MRI, although this was a highly select population. Data set analysis showed that IBTR has an adverse effect on survival. Furthermore, women experiencing a second tumour measuring >20 mm in diameter were at a significantly greater risk of death than those with no recurrence or those whose tumour was <10 mm in diameter. In the base-case analysis, the strategy with the highest net benefit, and most likely to be considered cost-effective, was surveillance mammography alone, provided every 12 months at a societal willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life-year of either £20,000 or £30,000. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for surveillance mammography alone every 12 months compared with no surveillance was £4727.
LIMITATIONS
Few studies met the review inclusion criteria and none of the studies was a randomised controlled trial. The limited and variable nature of the data available precluded any quantitative analysis. There was no useable evidence contained in the Breast Cancer Registry database to assess the effectiveness of surveillance mammography directly. The results of the economic model should be considered exploratory and interpreted with caution given the paucity of data available to inform the economic model.
CONCLUSIONS
Surveillance is likely to improve survival and patients should gain maximum benefit through optimal use of resources, with those women with a greater likelihood of developing IBTR or MCBC being offered more comprehensive and more frequent surveillance. Further evidence is required to make a robust and informed judgement on the effectiveness of surveillance mammography and follow-up. The utility of national data sets could be improved and there is a need for high-quality, direct head-to-head studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of tests used in the surveillance population.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Adult; Breast Neoplasms; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Databases, Factual; Female; Health Care Surveys; Humans; Incidence; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Mammography; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Prevalence; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Registries; Risk Factors; Sensitivity and Specificity; Survival Analysis; Ultrasonography; United Kingdom
PubMed: 21951942
DOI: 10.3310/hta15340 -
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Sep 2012Studies show a protective relationship between physical activity and breast cancer risk across the life course from menarche to postmenopausal years. Mammographic breast... (Review)
Review
Studies show a protective relationship between physical activity and breast cancer risk across the life course from menarche to postmenopausal years. Mammographic breast density is a known and strong breast cancer risk factor. Whether the association of physical activity with breast cancer risk is mediated through mammographic breast density is poorly understood. This systematic review summarizes published studies that investigated the association between physical activity and mammographic breast density and discusses the methodological issues that need to be addressed. We included in this review studies that were published before October 31, 2011 that were accessible in full-text format and were published in English. We identified 20 studies through the PubMed Central, BioMed Central, Embase, and Scopus and using the search terms "physical activity and breast density" and "exercise and breast density" as well as through manual searches of the bibliographies of the articles identified in electronic searches. We found no evidence of association between physical activity and breast density across the studies by grouping them first by the timing of physical activity assessment (in adolescence, current/recent, past, and lifetime) and then by women's menopausal status (premenopausal and postmenopausal). Given the strength of the relationship between physical activity and breast cancer and the null findings of this review, it is unlikely that the effect of physical activity is mediated through an effect on breast density.
Topics: Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Exercise; Female; Humans; Mammography; Risk Factors; Statistics, Nonparametric
PubMed: 22814722
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-012-2152-z -
Gland Surgery Aug 2015Currently, there is a lack of clear guidelines regarding evaluation and management of giant juvenile fibroadenomas. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Currently, there is a lack of clear guidelines regarding evaluation and management of giant juvenile fibroadenomas. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of giant juvenile fibroadenomas and to evaluate the most common diagnostic and therapeutic modalities.
METHODS
A systematic literature search of PubMed and MEDLINE databases was conducted in February 2014 to identify articles related to giant juvenile fibroadenomas. Pooled outcomes are reported.
RESULTS
Fifty-two articles (153 patients) met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 16.7 years old, with a mean lesion size of 11.2 cm. Most patients (86%) presented with a single breast mass. Imaging modalities included ultrasound in 72.5% and mammography in 26.1% of cases. Tissue diagnosis was obtained using a core needle biopsy in 18.3% of cases, fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in 25.5%, and excisional biopsy in 11.1% of patients. Surgical treatment was implemented in 98.7% of patients (mean time to treatment of 9.5 months, range, 3 days to 7 years). Surgical intervention included excision in all cases, of which four were mastectomies. Breast reconstruction was completed in 17.6% of cases. There were no postoperative complications.
CONCLUSIONS
Diagnosis and treatment of giant juvenile fibroadenoma is heterogeneous. There is a paucity of data to support observation and non-operative treatment. The most common diagnostic modalities include core needle or excisional biopsy. The mainstay of treatment is complete excision with an emphasis on preserving the developing breast parenchyma and nipple areolar complex. Breast reconstruction is uncommon, but may be necessary in certain cases.
PubMed: 26312217
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.06.04 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Oct 2020Breast cancer diagnosis and staging is based on mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) has gained... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Breast cancer diagnosis and staging is based on mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Contrast enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) has gained momentum as an innovative and clinically useful method for breast assessment. CESM is based on abnormal enhancement of neoplastic tissue compared to surrounding breast tissue. We performed a systematic review of prospective trial to evaluate its diagnostic performance, following standard PRISMA-DTA. We used a bivariate random-effects regression approach to obtain summary estimates of both sensitivity and specificity of CESM. 8 studies published between 2003 and 2019 were included in the meta-analysis for a total of 945 lesions. The summary area under the curve obtained from all the study was 89% [95% CI 86%-91%], with a sensitivity of 85% [95% CI 73%-93%], and a specificity of 77% [95% CI 60%-88%]. With a pre-test probability of malignancy of 57% a positive finding at CESM gives a post-test probability of 83% while a negative finding a post-test probability of 20%. CESM shows a suboptimal sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of breast cancer in a selected population, and at present time, it could be considered only as a possible alternative test for breast lesions assessment when mammography and ultrasound are not conclusive or MRI is contraindicated or not available.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Area Under Curve; Breast Neoplasms; Contrast Media; Diagnosis, Differential; Female; Humans; Mammography; Middle Aged; Sensitivity and Specificity; Spectrum Analysis
PubMed: 32540554
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.06.005 -
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) May 2022Cone-beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) remain the main 3D modalities for X-ray breast imaging. This study aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparison of Diagnostic Test Accuracy of Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Approach.
BACKGROUND
Cone-beam breast computed tomography (CBBCT) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) remain the main 3D modalities for X-ray breast imaging. This study aimed to systematically evaluate and meta-analyze the comparison of diagnostic accuracy of CBBCT and DBT to characterize breast cancers.
METHODS
Two independent reviewers identified screening on diagnostic studies from 1 January 2015 to 30 December 2021, with at least reported sensitivity and specificity for both CBBCT and DBT. A univariate pooled meta-analysis was performed using the random-effects model to estimate the sensitivity and specificity while other diagnostic parameters like the area under the ROC curve (AUC), positive likelihood ratio (LR+), and negative likelihood ratio (LR-) were estimated using the bivariate model.
RESULTS
The pooled sensitivity specificity, LR+ and LR- and AUC at 95% confidence interval are 86.7% (80.3-91.2), 87.0% (79.9-91.8), 6.28 (4.40-8.96), 0.17 (0.12-0.25) and 0.925 for the 17 included studies in DBT arm, respectively, while, 83.7% (54.6-95.7), 71.3% (47.5-87.2), 2.71 (1.39-5.29), 0.20 (0.04-1.05), and 0.831 are the pooled sensitivity specificity, LR+ and LR- and AUC for the five studies in the CBBCT arm, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Our study demonstrates that DBT shows improved diagnostic performance over CBBCT regarding all estimated diagnostic parameters; with the statistical improvement in the AUC of DBT over CBBCT. The CBBCT might be a useful modality for breast cancer detection, thus we recommend more prospective studies on CBBCT application.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Cone-Beam Computed Tomography; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Female; Humans; Mammography; Prospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity
PubMed: 35591290
DOI: 10.3390/s22093594 -
Journal of Medicine and Life Dec 2023Early detection measures for breast cancer, such as breast self-exams, clinical breast exams, and mammography, have considerable benefits in effectively reducing breast... (Review)
Review
Early detection measures for breast cancer, such as breast self-exams, clinical breast exams, and mammography, have considerable benefits in effectively reducing breast cancer-related mortality. As the incidence of breast cancer is steadily increasing, it is crucial to raise awareness on early detection. This scoping review assessed the current knowledge, attitudes, practices, and perceptions of breast cancer screening among female medical students. We used the six phases of Arksey and O'Malley's framework from the Joanna Briggs Institute Manual and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) template. Our analysis included 43 articles from Google Scholar and PubMed search engines, focusing on female medical students. Our results showed that most female medical students had a satisfactory level of knowledge about the most common signs, symptoms, and early detection methods of breast cancer. Generally, their attitude and perceptions were positive regarding breast cancer-related preventive measures. However, the level of practice was reduced. Further efforts are necessary to promote and improve the practice of breast self-examination, clinical breast exams, and mammography among female medical students. Potential interventions could include modifications to the medical curriculum and social media campaigns to enhance engagement and adoption of these practices.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Students, Medical; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Mammography
PubMed: 38585536
DOI: 10.25122/jml-2023-0412