Search

Background Previously, the risk of death from breast cancer was analyzed for women participating versus those not participating in the last screening examination before breast cancer diagnosis. Consecutive attendance patterns may further refine estimates. Purpose To estimate the effect of participation in successive mammographic screening examinations on breast cancer mortality. Materials and Methods Participation data for Swedish women eligible for screening mammography in nine counties from 1992 to 2016 were linked with data from registries and regional cancer centers for breast cancer diagnosis, cause, and date of death (Uppsala University ethics committee registration number: 2017/147). Incidence-based breast cancer mortality was calculated by whether the women had participated in the most recent screening examination prior to diagnosis only (intermittent participants), the penultimate screening examination only (lapsed participants), both examinations (serial participants), or neither examination (serial nonparticipants). Rates were analyzed with Poisson regression. We also analyzed incidence of breast cancers proving fatal within 10 years. Results Data were available for a total average population of 549 091 women (average age, 58.9 years ± 6.7 [standard deviation]). The numbers of participants in the four groups were as follows: serial participants, 392 135; intermittent participants, 41 746; lapsed participants, 30 945; and serial nonparticipants, 84 265. Serial participants had a 49% lower risk of breast cancer mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.51; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.55; P < .001) and a 50% lower risk of death from breast cancer within 10 years of diagnosis (RR, 0.50; 95% CI: 0.46, 0.55; P < .001) than serial nonparticipants. Lapsed and intermittent participants had a smaller reduction. Serial participants had significantly lower risk of both outcomes than lapsed or intermittent participants. Analyses correcting for potential biases made little difference to the results. Conclusion Women participating in the last two breast cancer screening examinations prior to breast cancer diagnosis had the largest reduction in breast cancer death. Missing either one of the last two examinations conferred a significantly higher risk. Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Stephen A. Feig in this issue.

Objectives: To explain apparent differences among mammography screening services in Sweden using individual data on participation in screening and with breast cancer-specific survival as an outcome., Methods: We analysed breast cancer survival data from the Swedish Cancer Register on breast cancer cases from nine Swedish counties diagnosed in women eligible for screening. Data were available on 38,278 breast cancers diagnosed and 4312 breast cancer deaths. Survival to death from breast cancer was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier estimate, for all cases in each county, and separately for cases of women participating and not participating in their last invitation to screening. Formal statistical comparisons of survival were made using proportional hazards regression., Results: All counties showed a reduction in the hazard of breast cancer death with participation in screening, but the reductions for individual counties varied substantially, ranging from 51% (95% confidence interval 46-55%) to 81% (95% confidence interval 74-85%). Survival rates in nonparticipating women ranged from 53% (95% confidence interval 40-65%) to 74% (95% confidence interval 72-77%), while the corresponding survival in women participating in screening varied from 80% (95% confidence interval 77-84%) to 86% (95% confidence interval 83-88%), a considerably narrower range., Conclusions: Differences among counties in the effect of screening on breast cancer outcomes were mainly due to variation in survival in women not participating in screening. Screening conferred similarly high survival rates in all counties. This indicates that the performance of screening services was similar across counties and that detection and treatment of breast cancer in early-stage reduces inequalities in breast cancer outcome.

Background: It is of paramount importance to evaluate the impact of participation in organized mammography service screening independently from changes in breast cancer treatment. This can be done by measuring the incidence of fatal breast cancer, which is based on the date of diagnosis and not on the date of death., Methods: Among 549,091 women, covering approximately 30% of the Swedish screening-eligible population, the authors calculated the incidence rates of 2473 breast cancers that were fatal within 10 years after diagnosis and the incidence rates of 9737 advanced breast cancers. Data regarding each breast cancer diagnosis and the cause and date of death of each breast cancer case were gathered from national Swedish registries. Tumor characteristics were collected from regional cancer centers. Aggregated data concerning invitation and participation were provided by Sectra Medical Systems AB. Incidence rates were analyzed using Poisson regression., Results: Women who participated in mammography screening had a statistically significant 41% reduction in their risk of dying of breast cancer within 10 years (relative risk, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.51-0.68 [P < .001]) and a 25% reduction in the rate of advanced breast cancers (relative risk, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66-0.84 [P < .001])., Conclusions: Substantial reductions in the incidence rate of breast cancers that were fatal within 10 years after diagnosis and in the advanced breast cancer rate were found in this contemporaneous comparison of women participating versus those not participating in screening. These benefits appeared to be independent of recent changes in treatment regimens., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Background: Women and their health care providers need a reliable answer to this important question: If a woman chooses to participate in regular mammography screening, then how much will this choice improve her chances of avoiding a death from breast cancer compared with women who choose not to participate?Methods: To answer this question, we used comprehensive registries for population, screening history, breast cancer incidence, and disease-specific death data in a defined population in Dalarna County, Sweden. The annual incidence of breast cancer was calculated along with the annual incidence of breast cancers that were fatal within 10 and within 11 to 20 years of diagnosis among women aged 40 to 69 years who either did or did not participate in mammography screening during a 39-year period (1977-2015). For an additional comparison, corresponding data are presented from 19 years of the prescreening period (1958-1976). All patients received stage-specific therapy according to the latest national guidelines, irrespective of the mode of detection.Results: The benefit for women who chose to participate in an organized breast cancer screening program was a 60% lower risk of dying from breast cancer within 10 years after diagnosis (relative risk, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.48) and a 47% lower risk of dying from breast cancer within 20 years after diagnosis (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.63) compared with the corresponding risks for nonparticipants.Conclusions: Although all patients with breast cancer stand to benefit from advances in breast cancer therapy, the current results demonstrate that women who have participated in mammography screening obtain a significantly greater benefit from the therapy available at the time of diagnosis than do those who have not participated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: As we have previously demonstrated, breast cancers originating in the major lactiferous ducts and propagating through the process of neoductgenesis are a distinct subtype of invasive breast cancers, although by current practice they are placed within the group termed ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and are consequently underdiagnosed and undertreated. Imaging biomarkers provide a reliable indication of the site of origin of this breast cancer subtype (Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the breast, DAB) and have excellent concordance with long-term patient outcome. In the present paper, the imaging biomarkers of DAB are described in detail to encourage and facilitate its recognition as a distinct, invasive breast cancer subtype.Methods: Correlation of breast imaging biomarkers with the corresponding histopathological findings using large format technology, with additional evidence from subgross, thick section histopathology to demonstrate the complex three-dimensional structure of the newly formed duct-like structures, neoducts.Results: There are six imaging biomarkers (mammographic tumour features) of DAB. Four subgroups have characteristic malignant-type calcifications on the mammogram. Two of these are characterized by intraluminal necrosis producing fragmented or dotted casting type calcifications on the mammogram; another two subgroups are characterized by intraductal fluid production which may eventually calcify, producing skipping stone-like or string of pearl-like calcifications. A fifth DAB subgroup presents with bloody or serous nipple discharge and is usually occult on mammography but is detectable with galactography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The sixth subgroup presents as architectural distortion on the mammogram without associated calcifications.Conclusions: Radiologists can use these well-defined imaging biomarkers to readily detect Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Breast, DAB. Immunochemical biomarkers are generally not determined from the DAB itself, due to the erroneous assumption that DAB is non-invasive. MRI plays a crucial role in determining disease extent and guiding surgical management. The accumulating evidence that this disease subtype is, in fact, an invasive cancer, necessitates an urgent re-evaluation of the diagnostic and management criteria for this poorly understood malignancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]