Dataset Information

Survival Rates of Breast Cancer Patients Aged 40 to 49 Years according to Detection Modality in Korea: Screening Ultrasound versus Mammography.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the survival rates of Korean females aged 40 to 49 years with breast cancer detected by supplemental screening ultrasound (US) or screening mammography alone.

Materials and methods

This single-institution retrospective study included 240 patients with breast cancer (mean age, 45.1 ± 2.8 years) detected by US or mammography who had undergone breast surgery between 2003 and 2008. Medical records were reviewed for clinicopathologic characteristics and detection methods. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients with breast cancer in the US and mammography groups using the log-rank test. Multivariable cox regression analysis was used to identify independent variables associated with DFS and OS.

Results

Among the 240 cases of breast cancer, 43 were detected by supplemental screening US and 197 by screening mammography (mean follow-up: 7.4 years, 93.3% with dense breasts). There were 19 recurrences and 16 deaths, all occurring in the mammography group. While the US group did not differ from the mammography group in tumor stage, the patients in this group were more likely to undergo breast-conserving surgery and radiation therapy than the mammography group. The US group also showed better DFS (p = 0.016); however, OS did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.058). In the multivariable analysis, the US group showed a lower risk of recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.097; 95% confidence interval, 0.001-0.705) compared to the mammography group.

Conclusion

Our study found that Korean females aged 40-49 years with US-detected breast cancer showed better DFS than those with mammography-detected breast cancer. However, there were no statistically significant differences in OS.

SUBMITTER: Won SY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7817635 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survival Rates of Breast Cancer Patients Aged 40 to 49 Years according to Detection Modality in Korea: Screening Ultrasound versus Mammography.

Won So Yeon SY Park Hyung Seok HS Kim Eun Kyung EK Kim Seung Il SI Moon Hee Jung HJ Yoon Jung Hyun JH Park Vivian Youngjean VY Park Seho S Kim Min Jung MJ Cho Young Up YU Park Byeong Woo BW

Korean journal of radiology 20200828 2

<h4>Objective</h4>The aim of this study was to compare the survival rates of Korean females aged 40 to 49 years with breast cancer detected by supplemental screening ultrasound (US) or screening mammography alone.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This single-institution retrospective study included 240 patients with breast cancer (mean age, 45.1 ± 2.8 years) detected by US or mammography who had undergone breast surgery between 2003 and 2008. Medical records were reviewed for clinicopathologic chara ...[more]

PMID: 32901456

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo analyze trends in detection method related to breast cancer stage at diagnosis, treatments, and outcomes over time among 40-49-year-old women.Materials and methodsi This study was institutional review board approved, with a waiver of informed consent, and HIPAA compliant. A longitudinal prospective cohort study was conducted of women aged 40-49 years who had primary breast cancer, during 1990-2008, and were identified and tracked by a dedicated registry database (n = 1977). Method of detection--patient detected (PtD), physician detected (PhysD), or mammography detected (MamD)--was chart abstracted. Disease-specific survival and relapse-free survival statistics were calculated by using the Kaplan-Meier method for stage I-IV breast cancer.ResultsA significant increase in the percentage of MamD breast cancer over time (28%-58%) and a concurrent decline in patient and physician detected (Pt/PhysD) breast cancer (73%-42%) (Pearson x(2) = 72.72, P < .001) were observed over time from 1990 to 2008, with an overall increase in lower-stage disease detection and a decrease in higher-stage disease. MamD breast cancer patients were more likely to undergo lumpectomy (67% vs 48% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients) and less likely to undergo modified radical mastectomy (25% vs 47% of the Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients) (P < .001). Uncorrected for stage, 13% of MamD breast cancer patients underwent surgery and chemotherapy versus 22% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients (P < .001), and 31% of MamD breast cancer patients underwent surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy versus 59% of Pt/PhysD breast cancer patients (x(2) = 305.13, P < .001). Analyzing invasive cancers only, 5-year relapse-free survival for MamD breast cancer patients was 92% versus 88% for Pt/PhysD patients (log-rank test, 12.47; P < .001).ConclusionIncreased mammography-detected breast cancer over time coincided with lower-stage disease detection resulting in reduced treatment and lower rates of recurrence, adding factors to consider when evaluating the benefits of mammography screening of women aged 40-49 years.

Project description:Background: Breast cancer screening practices and the influence of clinical guidelines or recommendations are well documented for physicians, but little is known about the screening practices of nonphysician providers (physician assistants and advanced practice registered nurses). The seven breast cancer screening guidelines or recommendations on the use of mammography have the most variation for screening average-risk women 40-49 years of age. Therefore, to better understand the practices of nonphysicians, this study will compare the practices of physicians with nonphysician providers for women 40-49 years of age. Materials and Methods: Minnesota physicians and nonphysicians were e-mailed an anonymous cross-sectional survey, which asked primary care providers about their mammography screening practices for average-risk women 40-44 and 45-49 years of age and to rate the influence of seven breast cancer screening recommendations on the use of mammography in their practice. Comparisons across providers' demographic and professional characteristics were conducted using chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests, as appropriate, and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Results: Of the respondents who practiced primary care (193 physicians, 50 physician assistants, and 197 advanced practice registered nurses), 66.7% reported recommending mammography for women at ages 40-44 and 77.2% recommended mammography for women at ages 45-49. Nonphysician providers were more likely to recommend screening in both these age groups (p?<?0.05). Having a self-identified interest in women's health was associated with more mammography screening in both age groups. The American Cancer Society guideline was endorsed as influential by the most respondents. Conclusions: Breast cancer screening practices vary between physicians and nonphysician providers for women 40-49 years of age at average risk. Targeted interventions may help reduce practice variation and ensure high-value care.

Project description:Background Risk-based screening in women 40-49 years old has not been evaluated in routine screening mammography practice. Purpose To use a cross-sectional study design to compare the trade-offs of risk-based and age-based screening for women 45 years of age or older to determine short-term outcomes. Materials and Methods A retrospective cross-sectional study was performed by using a database of 20 539 prospectively interpreted consecutive digital screening mammograms in 10 280 average-risk women aged 40-49 years who were screened at an academic medical center between January 1, 2006, and December 31, 2013. Two hypothetical screening scenarios were compared: an age-based (≥45 years) scenario versus a risk-based (a 5-year risk of breast cancer greater than that of an average 50-year-old) scenario. Risk factors for risk-based screening included family history, race, age, prior breast biopsy, and breast density. Outcomes included breast cancers detected at mammography, false-positive mammograms, and benign biopsy findings. Short-term outcomes were compared by using the χ2 test. Results The screening population included 71 148 screening mammograms in 24 928 women with a mean age of 55.5 years ± 8.9 (standard deviation) (age range, 40-74 years). In women 40-49 years old, usual care included 50 screening-detected cancers, 1787 false-positive mammograms, and 384 benign biopsy results. The age-based (≥45 years) screening strategy revealed more cancers than did the risk-based strategy (34 [68%] vs 13 [26%] of 50; P < .001), while prompting more false-positive mammograms (899 [50.3%] vs 216 [12.1%] of 1787; P < .001) and benign biopsy results (175 [45.6%] vs 49 [12.8%] of 384; P < .001). The risk-based strategy demonstrated low levels of eligibility (few screenings) in the 40-44-year age group. Differences in outcomes in the 45-49-year age group explained the overall hypothetical screening strategy differences. Conclusion Risk-based screening for women 40-49 years old includes few women in the 40-44-year age range. Significant trade-offs in the 45-49-year age group explain the overall difference between hypothetical screening scenarios, both of which reduce the benefits as well as the harms of mammography for women 40-49 years old. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Joe and Hayward in this issue.

Project description:Identifying risk factors for breast cancer specific to women in their 40s could inform screening decisions.To determine what factors increase risk for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years and the magnitude of risk for each factor.MEDLINE (January 1996 to the second week of November 2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (fourth quarter of 2011), Scopus, reference lists of published studies, and the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.English-language studies and systematic reviews of risk factors for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years. Additional inclusion criteria were applied for each risk factor.Data on participants, study design, analysis, follow-up, and outcomes were abstracted. Study quality was rated by using established criteria, and only studies rated as good or fair were included. Results were summarized by using meta-analysis when sufficient studies were available or from the best evidence based on study quality, size, and applicability when meta-analysis was not possible. Data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium were analyzed with proportional hazards models by using partly conditional Cox regression. Reference groups for comparisons were set at U.S. population means.Sixty-six studies provided data for estimates. Extremely dense breasts on mammography or first-degree relatives with breast cancer were associated with at least a 2-fold increase in risk for breast cancer. Prior breast biopsy, second-degree relatives with breast cancer, or heterogeneously dense breasts were associated with a 1.5- to 2.0-fold increased risk; current use of oral contraceptives, nulliparity, and age 30 years or older at first birth were associated with a 1.0- to 1.5-fold increased risk.Studies varied by measures, reference groups, and adjustment for confounders, which could bias combined estimates. Effects of multiple risk factors were not considered.Extremely dense breasts and first-degree relatives with breast cancer were each associated with at least a 2-fold increase in risk for breast cancer in women aged 40 to 49 years. Identification of these risk factors may be useful for personalized mammography screening.National Cancer Institute.

Dataset Information

Survival Rates of Breast Cancer Patients Aged 40 to 49 Years according to Detection Modality in Korea: Screening Ultrasound versus Mammography.

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Survival Rates of Breast Cancer Patients Aged 40 to 49 Years according to Detection Modality in Korea: Screening Ultrasound versus Mammography.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets