Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes according to the presence of previous benign breast disease and family history of breast cancer: supporting personalised screening

Analysis of Breast Cancer Screening Results and Influencing Factors of Breast Cancer in Guangdong Province from 2017 to 2021

BACKGROUNDS

Breast cancer screening plays an important role in the early detection, diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the screening results and explore the influencing factors of breast cancer detection rate in Guangdong.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted among 2,024,960 women aged 35-64 in Guangdong Province during 2017-2021. The data about breast cancer screening information were collected from the Guangdong maternal and child health information system. Descriptive statistical analysis was used to explain demographic characteristics and results of breast cancer screening. The generalized linear regression model was applied to analyze the related influencing factors of breast cancer detection rate.

RESULTS

The estimated detection rate of breast cancer in Guangdong Province is 70.32/105, with an early diagnosis rate of 82.06%. After adjusting covariates, those women with older age (45-55 [OR (95% CI) 2.174 (1.872, 2.526)], 55-65 [OR (95% CI) 2.162 (1.760, 2.657)]), education for high school ([OR (95% CI) 1.491 (1.254, 1.773)]) and older age at first birth ([OR (95% CI) 1.632 (1.445, 1.844)]) were more likely to have higher detection rate of breast cancer. No history of surgery or biopsy ([OR (95% CI) 0.527 (0.387, 0.718)]), no history of breast cancer check ([OR (95% CI) 0.873 (0.774, 0.985)]) and no family history of breast cancer ([OR (95% CI) 0.255 (0.151, 0.432)]) women were more likely to screen negative for breast cancer (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The detection rate of breast cancer in screening showed an increasing trend year by year in Guangdong Province. Older age, education for high school and older age at first birth were risk factors for breast cancer detection rate, while no surgery or biopsy history, no family history of breast cancer and no history of breast cancer check were protective factors.

Cumulative risks of false positive recall and screen-detected breast cancer after multiple screening examinations

Women tend to make a decision about participation in breast cancer screening and adhere to this for future invitations. Therefore, our study aimed to provide high-quality information on cumulative risks of false-positive (FP) recall and screen-detected breast cancer over multiple screening examinations. Individual Dutch screening registry data (2005-2018) were gathered on subsequent screening examinations of 92 902 women age 49 to 51 years in 2005. Survival analyses were used to calculate cumulative risks of a FP and a true-positive (TP) result after seven examinations. Data from 66 472 women age 58 to 59 years were used to extrapolate to 11 examinations. Participation, detection and additional FP rates were calculated for women who previously received FP results compared to women with true negative (TN) results. After 7 examinations, the cumulative risk of a TP result was 3.7% and the cumulative risk of a FP result was 9.1%. After 11 examinations, this increased to 7.1% and 13.5%, respectively. Following a FP result, participation was lower (71%-81%) than following a TN result (>90%). In women with a FP result, more TP results (factor 1.59 [95% CI: 1.44-1.72]), more interval cancers (factor 1.66 [95% CI: 1.41-1.91]) and more FP results (factor 1.96 [95% CI: 1.87-2.05]) were found than in women with TN results. In conclusion, due to a low recall rate in the Netherlands, the cumulative risk of a FP recall is relatively low, while the cumulative risk of a TP result is comparable. Breast cancer diagnoses and FP results were more common in women with FP results than in women with TN results, while participation was lower.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening indicators in a Spanish population-based program: a cohort study

Background:

To assess the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on performance indicators in the population-based breast cancer screening program of Parc de Salut Mar (PSMAR), Barcelona, Spain.

Methods:

We conducted a before-and-after, study to evaluate participation, recall, false positives, the cancer detection rate, and cancer characteristics in our screening population from March 2020 to March 2021 compared with the four previous rounds (2012–2019). Using multilevel logistic regression models, we estimated the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of each of the performance indicators for the COVID-19 period, controlling by type of screening (prevalent or incident), socioeconomic index, family history of breast cancer, and menopausal status. We analyzed 144,779 invitations from 47,571women.

Results:

During the COVID-19 period, the odds of participation were lower in first-time invitees (aOR = 0.90 [95% CI = 0.84–0.96]) and in those who had previously participated regularly and irregularly (aOR = 0.63 [95% CI = 0.59–0.67] and aOR = 0.95 [95% CI = 0.86–1.05], respectively). Participation showed a modest increase in women not attending any of the previous rounds (aOR = 1.10 [95% CI = 1.01–1.20]). The recall rate decreased in both prevalent and incident screening (aOR = 0.74 [95% CI = 0.56–0.99] and aOR = 0.80 [95% CI = 0.68–0.95], respectively). False positives also decreased in both groups (prevalent aOR = 0.92 [95% CI = 0.66–1.28] and incident aOR = 0.72 [95% CI = 0.59–0.88]). No significant differences were observed in compliance with recall (OR = 1.26, 95% CI = 0.76–2.23), cancer detection rate (aOR = 0.91 [95% CI = 0.69–1.18]), or cancer stages.

Conclusions:

The COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected screening attendance, especially in previous participants and newcomers. We found a reduction in recall and false positives and no marked differences in cancer detection, indicating the robustness of the program. There is a need for further evaluations of interval cancers and potential diagnostic delays.

Funding:

This study has received funding by grants PI19/00007 and PI21/00058, funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) and cofunded by the European Union and Grant RD21/0016/0020 funded by Instituto de Salud Carlos III and by the European Union NextGenerationEU, Mecanismo para la Recuperación y la Resiliencia (MRR).

Detection rate is not higher for women with BBD history in breast cancer screening

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether women with benign breast disease (BBD) history have higher breast cancer detection rate in screening.

METHODS

We reviewed data for 33 001 female participants in Multi-modality Independent Screening Trial (MIST). Corresponding data for 6823 breast cancer patients were retrieved from the Tianjin Breast Cancer Cases Cohort (TBCCC) and analyzed for comparison.

RESULTS

The breast cancer detection rate was 2.83‰ among women with BBD history and 3.28‰ in women without. Moreover, the proportion of carcinoma in situ (CIS) was also lower in women with BBD history than women without (7.69 versus 20.31%). In contrast, analysis of TBCCC data revealed a higher proportion of CIS in patients with BBD history (5.05%) than patients without (3.26%). Our data showed that a larger proportion of women with BBD history had undergone previous breast examinations. Additionally, among participants diagnosed with both breast cancer and BBD in MIST, we found a lower proportion of CIS in women with BBD history (11.76%) compared to women without (32.14%).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with BBD history were not found to have higher detection rate in breast cancer screening. Women with BBD history were more likely to be proactive in seeking breast examinations and to have breast cancer be diagnosed in clinic.

Risk factors for breast cancer development by tumor characteristics among women with benign breast disease

Background

Among women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, 30% have a prior diagnosis of benign breast disease (BBD). Thus, it is important to identify factors among BBD patients that elevate invasive cancer risk. In the general population, risk factors differ in their associations by clinical pathologic features; however, whether women with BBD show etiologic heterogeneity in the types of breast cancers they develop remains unknown.

Methods

Using a nested case-control study of BBD and breast cancer risk conducted in a community healthcare plan (Kaiser Permanente Northwest), we assessed relationships of histologic features in BBD biopsies and patient characteristics with subsequent breast cancer risk and tested for heterogeneity of associations by estrogen receptor (ER) status, tumor grade, and size. The study included 514 invasive breast cancer cases (median follow-up of 9 years post-BBD diagnosis) and 514 matched controls, diagnosed with proliferative or non-proliferative BBD between 1971 and 2006, with follow-up through mid-2015. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using multivariable polytomous logistic regression models.

Results

Breast cancers were predominantly ER-positive (86%), well or moderately differentiated (73%), small (74% < 20 mm), and stage I/II (91%). Compared to patients with non-proliferative BBD, proliferative BBD with atypia conferred increased risk for ER-positive cancer (OR = 5.48, 95% CI = 2.14–14.01) with only one ER-negative case, P-heterogeneity = 0.45. The presence of columnar cell lesions (CCLs) at BBD diagnosis was associated with a 1.5-fold increase in the risk of both ER-positive and ER-negative tumors, with a 2-fold increase (95% CI = 1.21–3.58) observed among postmenopausal women (56%), independent of proliferative BBD status with and without atypia. We did not identify statistically significant differences in risk factor associations by tumor grade or size.

Conclusion

Most tumors that developed after a BBD diagnosis in this cohort were highly treatable low-stage ER-positive tumors. CCL in BBD biopsies may be associated with moderately increased risk, independent of BBD histology, and irrespective of ER status.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13058-021-01410-1.

Epidemiological characteristics of and risk factors for breast cancer in the world

AIM

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and one of the most important causes of death among them. This review aimed to investigate the incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer and to identify the risk factors for breast cancer in the world.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus databases without any time restrictions. The search keywords included the following terms: breast cancer, risk factors, incidence, and mortality and a combination of these terms. Studies published in English that referred to various aspects of breast cancer including epidemiology and risk factors were included in the study. Overall, 142 articles published in English were included in the study.

RESULTS

Based on the published studies, the incidence rate of breast cancer varies greatly with race and ethnicity and is higher in developed countries. Results of this study show that mortality rate of breast cancer is higher in less developed regions. The findings of this study demonstrated that various risk factors including demographic, reproductive, hormonal, hereditary, breast related, and lifestyle contribute to the incidence of breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicated that incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer is rising, so design and implementation of screening programs and the control of risk factors seem essential.

Factors associated with time to breast cancer diagnosis and treatment in unscreened women in Portugal

Delays in detection, diagnosis and treatment may lead to poorer prognosis in women with breast cancer. We quantified time intervals from first detection (FD) to diagnosis (D) and first treatment (FT) and identified associated factors. We studied 282 patients diagnosed with breast cancer during 2012 at the Breast Clinic of the Portuguese Institute of Oncology in Porto, Portugal using face-to-face interview and medical records. Associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with time intervals was computed using adjusted percentage differences (adjPD) after logarithmic transformation, odds ratios (adjOR) for comparing the highest and lowest thirds of the distribution and 95 percent confidence intervals (CI) for both measures, using linear and logistic regression, respectively. The median times between FD and D and FT were 31 and 44 days, respectively. Significantly longer periods between FD and D were found in symptomatic women (adjPD = 99.5, 95 percent CI: 37.1, 190.0; adjOR = 3.16, 95 percent CI: 1.57, 6.33). More advanced stage was associated with shorter intervals between D and FT (adjPD = -33.8, 95 percent CI: -44.2, -21.5; adjOR = 0.14, 95 percent CI: 0.05, 0.34). Although some differences according to clinical characteristics were observed, they did not seem to translate into inequities in access to public healthcare in this group of women.