Rates for mastectomy are lower in women attending a breast-screening programme

The Association Between Mammography Screening Frequency and Breast Cancer Treatment and Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines for optimal frequency of screening mammography vary by professional society. Sparse evidence exists on the association between screening frequency and breast cancer treatment options. The main objective was to examine differences in cancer treatment rendered for U.S. women with different numbers of screenings prior to breast cancer diagnosis. Cancer stage at diagnosis and health care cost were assessed in secondary analyses.

METHODS

This IRB-exempt retrospective study used administrative claims data to identify women aged 44 or older with various numbers of mammographic screenings ≥11 months apart, during the four years prior to incident breast cancer diagnosis from January 2010 to December 2018. Outcomes were assessed over the six months following diagnosis. Generalized linear regression models were used to compare women with differing numbers of mammograms, adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Claims data review identified 25 492 women who met inclusion criteria. There was a stepwise improvement in each of these screening categories such that women with four screenings, compared to women with only one screening, experienced higher rates of lumpectomy (70% vs 55%) and radiation therapy (48% vs 36%), lower rates of mastectomy (27% vs 34%) and chemotherapy (28% vs 36%), less stage 3 or 4 cancer at diagnosis (15% vs 29%), and lower health care costs within six months postdiagnosis (P < 0.001). Results were similar in a subgroup limited to women aged 44 to 49 at diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Potential benefits of more frequent screening include less aggressive treatment and lower health care costs among women who develop breast cancer.

Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: A systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Mammography screening is generally accepted in women aged 50-69, but the balance between benefits and harms remains controversial in other age groups. This study systematically reviews these effects to inform the European Breast Cancer Guidelines.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of observational studies in the absence of RCTs comparing invitation to mammography screening to no invitation in women at average breast cancer (BC) risk. We extracted data for mortality, BC stage, mastectomy rate, chemotherapy provision, overdiagnosis and false-positive-related adverse effects. We performed a pooled analysis of relative risks, applying an inverse-variance random-effects model for three age groups (<50, 50-69 and 70-74). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 10 RCTs including 616,641 women aged 38-75. Mammography reduced BC mortality in women aged 50-69 (relative risk (RR) 0.77, 95%CI (confidence interval) 0.66-0.90, high certainty) and 70-74 (RR 0.77, 95%CI 0.54-1.09, high certainty), with smaller reductions in under 50s (RR 0.88, 95%CI 0.76-1.02, moderate certainty). Mammography reduced stage IIA+ in women 50-69 (RR 0.80, 95%CI 0.64-1.00, very low certainty) but resulted in an overdiagnosis probability of 23% (95%CI 18-27%) and 17% (95%CI 15-20%) in under 50s and 50-69, respectively (moderate certainty). Mammography was associated with 2.9% increased risk of invasive procedures with benign outcomes (low certainty).

CONCLUSIONS

For women 50-69, high certainty evidence that mammography screening reduces BC mortality risk would support policymakers formulating strong recommendations. In other age groups, where the net balance of effects is less clear, conditional recommendations will be more likely, together with shared decision-making.

Comparison between opportunistic and organised breast cancer mammography screening in the Swiss canton of Fribourg

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer screening mammography is widespread in industrialised countries within the framework of public health program or opportunist form. Only few data exist on the comparison of effectiveness between organised and opportunistic screening. The aim of this study is to compare organised and opportunistic screening using population-based data from the Fribourg cancer registry, Switzerland.

METHODS

We included all first primary breast adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2006 and 2014 in women aged 50-69 years resident in the canton of Fribourg. We considered only breast cancer discovered by mammography screening. We compared patients, tumour characteristics and treatment modalities between breast cancer detected by the organised screening program versus opportunistic screening using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Out of 989 patients diagnosed with breast cancer, 402 (40.6%) were diagnosed by organised and 205 (20.7%) by opportunistic screening. Women with breast cancer detected within the screening program were more likely to be from rural areas (P = 0.035) and lived less frequently in high favoured regions (P = 0.020). They presented more frequently in situ than invasive cancer (P = 0.022). For patients with invasive breast cancer, those detected by the program were less likely to undergo mastectomy (P = 0.06) and consequently, they were more likely to undergo radiation therapy (P = 0.003). Adjustment for area of residence and financial context of the region did not modify the results presented.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study reports an increased rate of detection of carcinoma in situ in organised screening program as compared to opportunistic screening mammographies, an indirect evidence of a higher radiologic sensitivity. Furthermore, the results show a trend towards more mastectomies among patients with breast cancer discovered after opportunistic than after organized mammography screening, reflecting lower treatment burden. Those results were independent of socio-economic factors which differed across screening groups.

Short- and Long-Term (10-year) Results of an Organized, Population-Based Breast Cancer Screening Program: Comparative, Observational Study from Hungary

BACKGROUND

A nationwide breast cancer screening program was introduced in Hungary in the year 2002 for women aged 45-65 years to be performed biannually.

METHODS

To investigate and report the short-term and 10-year follow-up results, we analyzed our Breast Unit's prospectively led database of screened (Group A) and age-matched symptomatic (Group B) patients from 2002 to 2007. We compared the clinicopathologic features of tumors and the impact of screening on surgical treatment, as well as the overall (OS), disease-specific (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of different groups.

RESULTS

Data from 208 screen-detected and 101 symptomatic patients between 45 and 65 years of age were examined. Screen-detected women were younger (54 vs. 58.5 years; p = 0.001) had significantly smaller tumors (15.5 vs. 17 mm; p = 0.044), and more breast-conserving surgery (68.8 vs. 59.4%; p = 0.032). Survival statistics were not statistically different at the median follow-up of 123 months; however, there was a trend toward improved DFS in Group A (82.7 vs. 74.3%; p = 0.074).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed a significant reduction in rates of mastectomy in the screen-detected group in the short term, which does not translate into better survival rates based on initial long-term data. In order to realize the real advantage of this newly enstated screening program, a longer period of investigation is needed.

European Code against Cancer, 4th Edition: Cancer screening

In order to update the previous version of the European Code against Cancer and formulate evidence-based recommendations, a systematic search of the literature was performed according to the methodology agreed by the Code Working Groups. Based on the review, the 4th edition of the European Code against Cancer recommends: "Take part in organized cancer screening programmes for: Bowel cancer (men and women); Breast cancer (women); Cervical cancer (women)." Organized screening programs are preferable because they provide better conditions to ensure that the Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Screening are followed in order to achieve the greatest benefit with the least harm. Screening is recommended only for those cancers where a demonstrated life-saving effect substantially outweighs the potential harm of examining very large numbers of people who may otherwise never have, or suffer from, these cancers, and when an adequate quality of the screening is achieved. EU citizens are recommended to participate in cancer screening each time an invitation from the national or regional screening program is received and after having read the information materials provided and carefully considered the potential benefits and harms of screening. Screening programs in the European Union vary with respect to the age groups invited and to the interval between invitations, depending on each country's cancer burden, local resources, and the type of screening test used For colorectal cancer, most programs in the EU invite men and women starting at the age of 50-60 years, and from then on every 2 years if the screening test is the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test or fecal immunochemical test, or every 10 years or more if the screening test is flexible sigmoidoscopy or total colonoscopy. Most programs continue sending invitations to screening up to the age of 70-75 years. For breast cancer, most programs in the EU invite women starting at the age of 50 years, and not before the age of 40 years, and from then on every 2 years until the age of 70-75 years. For cervical cancer, if cytology (Pap) testing is used for screening, most programs in the EU invite women starting at the age of 25-30 years and from then on every 3 or 5 years. If human papillomavirus testing is used for screening, most women are invited starting at the age of 35 years (usually not before age 30 years) and from then on every 5 years or more. Irrespective of the test used, women continue participating in screening until the age of 60 or 65 years, and continue beyond this age unless the most recent test results are normal.

Mammography Screening - as of 2013

Introduction: Since 2008 the German Mammography Screening Programme has been available throughout Germany to all women aged between 50 and 69. The programme strictly follows the European Guidelines. There are controversial discussions in the media as well as in the specialised press. Materials and Methods: Overview of the available data with regard to an evaluation of randomised studies and with regard to quality-assured screening programmes in accordance with EU Guidelines (including data from 18 screening countries). Results: Positive effects of screening: reduction in mortality, less invasive treatment. Negative effects: False-positive diagnoses and biopsy recommendations, so-called overdiagnoses, radiation dose. Limits of screening: Interval carcinomas, incomplete reduction in mortality. A mathematical synopsis of the latest publications from the European screening programmes with the diagnosis rates in Germany determined from > 4.6 million screening examinations produces the following: a total of 10 000 mammograms are created for 1000 women (P) taking part in the Mammography Screening Programme (each of whom undergoes 10 mammograms in 20 years). Overall, the risk of triggering breast cancer through a mammogram is very clearly below the annual natural risk of suffering from breast cancer. In the German screening, of these 1000 women, an average of 288 women are called back once in 20 years as a result of changes that are ultimately benign (< 3 % per cycle). Of these, 74 of the 288 women undergo a biopsy due to a benign change (false-positive biopsy recommendations, usually punch or vacuum biopsies). According to EUROSCREEN, 71 carcinomas develop among participants (56 are discovered in the screening, 15 in the interval), and 67 carcinomas among non-participants (N-P) (in some cases, several years later) during this period. The 4 additional diagnoses among the Ps are referred to as overdiagnoses, as they do not contribute to a reduction in mortality (these participants die beforehand from other causes of death). With regard to the carcinomas that concern the screening periods, 11 women out of 1000 die among the Ps; there are 19 deaths among the N-Ps (within the observation period plus follow-up period). Discussion: The false-positive rate is unavoidable, but is far lower with mammography screening than with other methods. Overdiagnoses are to be expected with any early detection. All calculations require assumptions and are therefore highly discrepant. They have very low evidence levels. The radiation dose should not be an argument against screening when applied correctly due to the very low risk and significant benefits. Interval carcinomas indicate the limits of a mammography screening programme. False-negatives only represent a subset of the interval carcinomas and are not to be equated with them. There is a very high evidence level for a significant reduction in mortality through mammography screening. For the first time, an independent expert commission has confirmed the results of the randomised studies and the statement of the WHO from 2002 and their further validity. Participants can expect a reduction in mortality of 30 %. Data from the current European screening programmes confirm a mortality reduction of 43 %, corresponding to 8/19 saved lives among 71 women with breast cancer or 1000 asymptomatic Ps. Many additional Ps benefit from less invasive treatment due to the early detection. Conclusions: As a result of the risk/benefit ratio, mammography screening should absolutely be recommended to asymptomatic women aged between 50-69. High importance is given to the provision of education for women by the treating gynaecologists as regards the opportunities for quality-assured early detection available to them in the healthcare system.

Breast cancer mastectomy trends between 2006 and 2010: association with magnetic resonance imaging, immediate breast reconstruction, and hospital volume

PURPOSE

Analysis of mastectomy rates in breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2006 and 2010 in Germany with focus on impact of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) rates, and hospital volume as possible influencing factors of mastectomy rates.

METHODS

Data of a voluntary monitored benchmarking project were used to evaluate mastectomy trends across time in an unselected cohort of breast cancer patients. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify predictive factors of mastectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 142.863 cases were included into the analysis. There was an overall decrease of 5.9% (95% confidence interval 5.1-6.7) in mastectomy trend from 36.5% in 2006 to 30.6% in 2010 (P < 0.0001). Known predictive factors were confirmed. Breast MRI (odds ratio 1.42, 95% confidence interval 1.36-1.47) and small hospitals (<150 cases per year) seem to favor mastectomy. IBR was not associated with mastectomy rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Mastectomy rates in comparable health systems differ. Performance of preoperative breast MRI and hospital volume seem to be independent influencing factors for mastectomy rates.

Predictors of surgical margin status in breast-conserving surgery within a breast screening program

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving surgery (BCS) requires clear surgical margins to minimize local recurrence. We sought to identify groups of patients at higher risk of involved margins who might benefit from preoperative counselling and/or more generous excision at the first operation.

METHODS

We reviewed demographic, clinical, radiological and pathological records of all women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive cancer (IC) through a population-based breast screening program in Melbourne, Australia between 1994 and 2005.

RESULTS

A total of 2,160 women were diagnosed with DCIS or IC. We excluded 199 who had mastectomy (TM) as initial procedure or had missing data. Three hundred and thirteen had a diagnostic biopsy. Of 1,648 women who had BCS after a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS or IC, 13.5% had involved margins, 16.6% had close (</=1 mm), and 69.8% clear (>1 mm) margins. Of the patients, 281/1,648 (17.1%) underwent re-excision, of whom 93 (33.1%) had residual disease identified. Mammographic microcalcifications (P < 0.0001), absence of a mammographic mass (P = 0.002), presence of DCIS (P < 0.0001), high tumour grade (P < 0.0001), large size (P < 0.0001), multifocal disease (P < 0.0001) and lobular histology (P = 0.005) were associated with involved margins. Microcalcifications (odds ratio [OR] 1.97), large size (OR 4.22) and multifocal disease (OR 2.85) were independently associated with involved margins. Residual disease was associated with involved margins (P < 0.0001), presence of DCIS (P = 0.05) and large tumour size (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

After BCS, patients with mammographic microcalcifications, larger tumour size and multifocal tumours are more likely to have involved margins. Patients with involved margins, large tumour size and/or a DCIS component are more likely to have residual disease on re-excision.

The breast cancer experience of rural women: a literature review

This report is a review of studies that focus on rural breast cancer survivorship. It includes a total of 14 studies using large databases and 27 other studies using qualitative and quantitative methods. In our review of this literature, we identified four broad themes, including access to treatment and treatment type, medical providers and health information, psychosocial adjustment and coping, and social support and psychological support services. We review the findings of the rural breast cancer survivorship studies within each of these broad themes. A few of the findings of the review include that rural and urban women receive different primary treatments for breast cancer, that rural women may have greater difficulty negotiating their traditional gender roles during and after treatment, that rural women desire greater health-related information about their breast cancer, and that rural women have less access to mental health therapy. The review discusses the implications of these findings as well as the weakness in the literature.

Mastectomy rates are decreasing in the era of service screening: a population-based study in Italy (1997-2001)

We enrolled all 2162 in situ and 21 148 invasive cases of breast cancer in 17 areas of Italy, diagnosed in 1997–2001. Rates of early cancer increased by 13.7% in the screening age group (50–69 years), and breast conserving surgery by 24.6%. Advanced cancer rates decreased by 19.4%, and mastectomy rates by 24.2%. Service screening did not increase mastectomy rates in the study population.