Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21540443/ below:

Tumor characteristics associated with mammographic detection of breast cancer in the Ontario breast screening program

Comparative Study

Affiliations

• ¹ Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, 620 University Ave, Toronto, ON M5G 2L7, Canada. anna.chiarelli@cancercare.on.ca

• PMID: 21540443
• DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr138

Item in Clipboard

Comparative Study

Victoria A Kirsh et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011.

• ¹ Prevention and Cancer Control, Cancer Care Ontario, 620 University Ave, Toronto, ON M5G 2L7, Canada. anna.chiarelli@cancercare.on.ca

• PMID: 21540443
• DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr138

Item in Clipboard

Background: Few studies have compared the prognostic value of tumor characteristics by type of breast cancer diagnosed in the interval between mammographic screenings with screen-detected breast cancers.

Methods: We conducted a case-case study within the cohort of women (n = 431 480) in the Ontario Breast Screening Program who were aged 50 years and older and were screened between January 1, 1994, and December 31, 2002. Interval cancers, defined as breast cancers diagnosed within 24 months after a negative screening mammogram, were designated as true interval cancers (n = 288) or missed interval cancers (n = 87) if they were not identified at the time of screening but were identified in retrospect. Screen-detected breast cancers (n = 450) were selected to match interval cancers. Tumors were evaluated for stage, grade, mitotic index, histology, and expression of hormone receptors and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by conditional logistic regression.

Results: Both true and missed interval cancers were of higher stage and grade than matched screen-detected breast cancers. However, true interval cancers had a higher mitotic index (OR = 3.13, 95% CI = 1.81 to 5.42), a higher percentage of nonductal histology (OR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.05 to 3.59), and were more likely to be both estrogen receptor-negative (OR = 2.09, 95% CI = 1.32 to 3.30) and progesterone receptor-negative (OR = 2.49, 95% CI = 1.68 to 3.70) compared with matched screen-detected tumors.

Conclusions: In this study, interval cancers were of higher stage and grade compared with screen-detected cancers. True interval cancers were more likely to have additional adverse prognostic features of estrogen and progesterone receptor negativity and nonductal morphology. The findings suggest a need for more sensitive screening modalities to detect true interval breast cancers and different approaches for early detection of fast-growing tumors.

PubMed Disclaimer

• Influence of patterns of hormone replacement therapy use and mammographic density on breast cancer detection.

  Chiarelli AM, Kirsh VA, Klar NS, Shumak R, Jong R, Fishell E, Yaffe MJ, Boyd NF. Chiarelli AM, et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Oct;15(10):1856-62. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0290. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006. PMID: 17035392

• Favourable prognostic factors of subsequent screen-detected breast cancers among women aged 50-69.

  Chiarelli AM, Edwards SA, Sheppard AJ, Mirea L, Chong N, Paszat L, Shumak RS, Oʼmalley FP; Breast Screening Study Group. Chiarelli AM, et al. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2012 Nov;21(6):499-506. doi: 10.1097/CEJ.0b013e328350b0f4. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2012. PMID: 22273849 Review.

• Digital compared to screen-film mammography: breast cancer prognostic features in an organized screening program.

  Prummel MV, Done SJ, Muradali D, Majpruz V, Brown P, Jiang H, Shumak RS, Yaffe MJ, Holloway CM, Chiarelli AM. Prummel MV, et al. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014 Sep;147(2):389-99. doi: 10.1007/s10549-014-3088-2. Epub 2014 Aug 10. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014. PMID: 25108740

• Breast tumor characteristics as predictors of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers.

  Porter PL, El-Bastawissi AY, Mandelson MT, Lin MG, Khalid N, Watney EA, Cousens L, White D, Taplin S, White E. Porter PL, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Dec 1;91(23):2020-8. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.23.2020. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999. PMID: 10580027

• Using tumor phenotype, histological tumor distribution, and mammographic appearance to explain the survival differences between screen-detected and clinically detected breast cancers.

  Chuang SL, Chen SL, Yu CP, Chang KJ, Yen AM, Chiu SY, Fann JC, Tabár L, Stephen DW, Smith RA, Chen HH. Chuang SL, et al. APMIS. 2014 Aug;122(8):699-707. doi: 10.1111/apm.12294. APMIS. 2014. PMID: 25046200 Review.

• Synergistic effects of curcumin with emodin against the proliferation and invasion of breast cancer cells through upregulation of miR-34a.

  Guo J, Li W, Shi H, Xie X, Li L, Tang H, Wu M, Kong Y, Yang L, Gao J, Liu P, Wei W, Xie X. Guo J, et al. Mol Cell Biochem. 2013 Oct;382(1-2):103-11. doi: 10.1007/s11010-013-1723-6. Epub 2013 Jun 15. Mol Cell Biochem. 2013. PMID: 23771315

• Integrating biology and access to care in addressing breast cancer disparities: 25 years' research experience in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study.

  Emerson MA, Reeder-Hayes KE, Tipaldos HJ, Bell ME, Sweeney MR, Carey LA, Earp HS, Olshan AF, Troester MA. Emerson MA, et al. Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2020 Sep;12(3):149-160. doi: 10.1007/s12609-020-00365-0. Epub 2020 May 14. Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2020. PMID: 33815665 Free PMC article.

• Educational Case: Invasive Ductal Carcinoma of the Breast.

  Scholl AR, Flanagan MB. Scholl AR, et al. Acad Pathol. 2020 Jan 21;7:2374289519897390. doi: 10.1177/2374289519897390. eCollection 2020 Jan-Dec. Acad Pathol. 2020. PMID: 32010760 Free PMC article.

• Expression patterns of microRNA-329 and its clinical performance in diagnosis and prognosis of breast cancer.

  Li P, Dong J, Zhou X, Sun W, Huang H, Chen T, Ye B, Zheng Z, Lu M. Li P, et al. Onco Targets Ther. 2017 Nov 28;10:5711-5718. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S147974. eCollection 2017. Onco Targets Ther. 2017. PMID: 29238203 Free PMC article.

• Evaluation of breast stiffness pathology based on breast compression during mammography: Proposal for novel breast stiffness scale classification.

  Prokop J, Maršálek P, Sengul I, Pelikán A, Janoutová J, Horyl P, Roman J, Sengul D, Junior JMS. Prokop J, et al. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2022 Sep 19;77:100100. doi: 10.1016/j.clinsp.2022.100100. eCollection 2022. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2022. PMID: 36137345 Free PMC article.

RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.3