Search

Background: Disparity between mammographic and pathological sizing of DCIS can lead to surgical overtreatment, with poor cosmetic outcomes of breast conservation surgery (BCS) or inappropriate mastectomy versus undertreatment, with subsequent need for re-excision. In addition, where mammographic size is smaller than pathological size, this may reflect an increased risk of mammographically occult residual disease post surgery; where pathological size is smaller than mammographic size there is a possibility of pathological underestimation or missed positive margins, with both scenarios resulting in increased risk of recurrence. Methods: The Sloane Project, within the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme, is a prospective cohort study of screen detected DCIS (2003-2012), with recurrence data for a median follow-up of 9 years. The NHS Breast Screening Programme screens women from age 50-70. We assessed factors associated with mammographic/pathology disparity, leading to i) 'downsizing' from pre-operative mammographic size estimation to final surgically resected pathological size or ii) 'upsizing' from pre-operative mammographic size to surgically resected pathological size. We defined 'downsizing' as pathological size 10mm or >5mm larger than mammographic size. Ipsilateral recurrence rates were determined in patients with mammographic/pathology disparity (downsized or upsized) compared to those with accurate preoperative sizing. Results: Using a 10mm size disparity, among 10829 patients, DCIS was downsized (pathological size smaller than mammographic size) in 26%, upsized in 19% and similar in 54%. Mastectomy was associated with marked mammographic/pathology disparity, with a 3.90RR of downsizing (p The results remained similar when patients prescribed endocrine therapy or radiotherapy were excluded. Re-excision (but not completion mastectomy) is associated with increased recurrence, with recurrence occurring in 237 of 5157 not requiring re-excision but 99 of 1488 requiring re-excision; RR: 1.45 (1.15-1.82). Conclusion: Large mammographic size, microcalcification casting features and young age (size overestimation) versus microcalcification and high density (size underestimation) should be considered in selecting surgery for DCIS. Mammographic/pathology disparity of only 5mm, whether this leads to downsizing or upsizing, is associated with an increased risk of ipsilateral recurrence after breast conservation. Table 1.In patients undergoing breast conservation, impact of 10mm and 5 mm mammographic/pathology disparity on ipsilateral recurrence rateTotalIpsilateral recurrence, n (%)RR (CI)Change in size of >10mmNo change3062158 (5.2%)1downsized111666 (5.9%)1.15 (0.87-1.51)upsized52036 (6.9%)1.34 (0.95-1.90)unknown19112 (6.3%)1.22 (0.69-2.15)TOTAL4889272 (5.6%)Change in size of >5mmNo change2783118 (4.2%)1downsized1953115 (5.9%)1.39 (1.08-1.78)upsized139580 (5.7%)1.35 (1.03-1.78)unknown23814 (5.9%)1.39 (0.81-2.38)TOTAL6369327 (5.1%) Citation Format: Cliona Clare Kirwan, Bridget Hilton, Karen Clements, Hilary Stobart, Matthew Wallis, Senthurun Mylvaganam, Elena Provenzano, Anthony Maxwell, Nisha Sharma, Abeer Shaaban, David Dodwell, Joanne Dulson-Cox, Elinor Sawyer, Olive Kearins, Samantha Brace-McDonnell, Sarah Pinder, Alastair M Thompson. Predictors of inaccurate pre-operative size assessment of screen detected DCIS and impact on recurrence rates [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-22-01.

Background/objectives The natural history of microinvasive carcinoma of the breast (one or more foci of invasion of 1mm or less) and its optimal management remain controversial. We analysed the frequency and outcome of patients with DCIS plus microinvasion within a large prospective cohort of screen-detected DCIS. Methods Patients with screen-detected DCIS diagnosed between 2003 and 2012 with or without microinvasion in the final surgical specimen were identified from the UK Sloane Project database. Comprehensive imaging, surgical, pathology, oncology and subsequent outcome data were collected with a median follow-up of 9 years. Results Among 11285 DCIS patients diagnosed in the UK, microinvasion was reported in 521 (4.6%). The frequency of reported microinvasion varied considerably among screening units (0-25%) but overall decreased from 7% in 2003/04 to 3% in 2011/12.As reported elsewhere, microinvasion was significantly associated with high grade DCIS (5.9% of 7182 cases) compared to 2.9% of intermediate grade and 40mm had microinvasive foci reported. Microinvasion was also associated with the presence of comedo necrosis (p Citation Format: Abeer M Shaaban, Bridget Hilton, Karen Clements, David Dodwell, Nisha Sharma, Cliona Kirwan, Elinor Sawyer, Anthony Maxwell, Matthew Wallis, Hilary Stobart, Senthurun Mylvaganam, Janet.Litherland Litherland, Samantha Brace-Mcdonnell, Joanne Dulson-Cox, Olive Kearins, Elena Provenzano, Sarah Pinder, Alastair Thompson. The diagnosis and prognosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with microinvasion - Results from the United Kingdom Sloane project [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-12-36.

Background The variable natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is poorly understood. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the outcomes of women who were diagnosed through the English National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHS BSP) and had no surgery for screen-detected DCIS. Method English NHS BSP databases were searched for women diagnosed with DCIS without invasive cancer on needle biopsy between 1 April 2001 and 31 March 2018 inclusive, who had no record of surgery within 6 months of diagnosis. These were cross-referenced with cancer registry data for further treatment, event information and mortality records. Details of potentially eligible women were sent to the relevant breast screening units for verification and for completion of data forms detailing clinical, radiological and pathological findings, non-surgical treatment, subsequent clinical course and outcomes. Results Data for 311 eligible women (median age 62 years) were included, with median follow-up (primary DCIS diagnosis to either surgery, development of invasive disease, death or last known to be alive) of 4.1 years (range 0.5 to 17.4 years). The median age at diagnosis was 64 years (range 47 to 90 years). Sixty (19%) women developed invasive breast cancer, 56 ipsilateral and 4 contralateral. Twenty-two women (7%) underwent surgery for DCIS (>6 months after diagnosis) and 86 (28%) died of other causes. Women with high or intermediate grade DCIS were significantly more likely to develop ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (iIBC) than those with low grade DCIS. 28/123 (23%) with high grade DCIS, 21/105 (20%) with intermediate grade DCIS, 5/76 (7%) with low grade DCIS and 2/7 (29%) with an unknown grade of DCIS developed iIBC. Ipsilateral invasion risk increased approximately linearly with time for at least 10 years. Women who developed iIBC were significantly younger than those who did not. This was driven primarily by a strong association among those with high grade DCIS. There was no significant difference in age between those with intermediate and low grade DCIS respectively who did or did not develop iIBC. The median baseline size of DCIS in women who developed iIBC was higher than in women who did not develop iIBC, both overall and in each of the three grade categories (median sizes - high grade 38 mm vs 29 mm, p=0.19; intermediate grade 35 mm vs 18 mm, p=0.31; low grade 18 mm vs 15 mm, p=0.38). This reached statistical significance for all grades combined: 37 mm (range 3-95) v 20 mm (range 3-200), p=0.02. Of the 262 women with a known microinvasion status, 8/25 (32%) with definite or possible microinvasion were subsequently diagnosed with ipsilateral invasive cancer compared to 38/237 (16%) without microinvasion (p=0.027). There was no significant association on univariable analysis between risk of iIBC and microcalcification as the predominant radiological feature (iIBC and microcalcification 47/258 vs iIBC and other radiological feature 7/46; p=0.83), the presence of histological necrosis (iIBC and necrosis, 14/89 vs iIBC and no necrosis, 31/157; p=0.49) or the use of ET (iIBC and ET 11/67 vs iIBC and no ET 45/244; p=0.86). Of the 51 invasive cancers that developed with a known grade, 46 (90%) were grade 2 or 3. Conclusion The findings suggest that women diagnosed with high or intermediate grade DCIS and those with microinvasion should continue to be offered surgery. For those with low grade DCIS there is a need for shared decision-making in the choice of surgery or active surveillance based on a discussion of the risks and benefits of the options as currently understood, and in the light of the low reproducibility of DCIS grading. Citation Format: Karen Clements, Anthony Maxwell, Bridget Hilton, Matthew Wallis, Cliona Kirwan, Hilary Stobart, Elena Provenzano, Nisha Sharma, Janet Litherland, Abeer Shaaban, David Dodwell, Joanne Dulson-Cox, Elinor Sawyer, Senthurun Mylvaganam, Olive Kearins, Samantha Brace-McDonnell, Sarah Pinder, Alastair Thompson. A longitudinal cohort study of outcomes in 311 women with unresected ductal carcinoma in situ detected through the English breast screening programme [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2021 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2021 Dec 7-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-22-06.

Background Population breast screening services in England were suspended in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Here, we estimate the number of breast cancers whose detection may be delayed because of the suspension, and the potential impact on cancer deaths over 10 years. Methods We estimated the number and length of screening delays from observed NHS Breast Screening System data. We then estimated additional breast cancer deaths from three routes: asymptomatic tumours progressing to symptomatically diagnosed disease, invasive tumours which remain screen-detected but at a later date, and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) progressing to invasive disease by detection. We took progression rates, prognostic characteristics, and survival rates from published sources. Results We estimated that 1,489,237 women had screening delayed by around 2–7 months between July 2020 and June 2021, leaving 745,277 outstanding screens. Depending on how quickly this backlog is cleared, around 2500–4100 cancers would shift from screen-detected to symptomatic cancers, resulting in 148–452 additional breast cancer deaths. There would be an additional 164–222 screen-detected tumour deaths, and 71–97 deaths from DCIS that progresses to invasive cancer. Conclusions An estimated 148–687 additional breast cancer deaths may occur as a result of the pandemic-related disruptions. The impact depends on how quickly screening services catch up with delays.

Minimum caseload standards for professionals examining breast screening mammograms vary from 480 (US) to 5000 (Europe). We measured the relationship between the number of women’s mammograms examined per year and reader performance. We extracted routine records from the English NHS Breast Screening Programme for readers examining between 1000 and 45,000 mammograms between April 2014 and March 2017. We measured the relationship between the volume of cases read and screening performance (cancer detection rate, recall rate, positive predictive value of recall (PPV) and discrepant cancers) using linear logistic regression. We also examined the effect of reader occupational group on performance. In total, 759 eligible mammography readers (445 consultant radiologists, 235 radiography advanced practitioners, 79 consultant radiographers) examined 6.1 million women’s mammograms during the study period. PPV increased from 12.9 to 14.4 to 17.0% for readers examining 2000, 5000 and 10000 cases per year respectively. This was driven by decreases in recall rates from 5.8 to 5.3 to 4.5 with increasing volume read, and no change in cancer detection rate (from 7.6 to 7.6 to 7.7). There was no difference in cancer detection rate with reader occupational group. Consultant radiographers had higher recall rate and lower PPV compared to radiologists (OR 1.105, p = 0.012; OR 0.874, p = 0.002, unadjusted). Positive predictive value of screening increases with the total volume of cases examined per reader, through decreases in numbers of cases recalled with no concurrent change in numbers of cancers detected. • In the English Breast Screening Programme, readers who examined a larger number of cases per year had a higher positive predictive value, because they recalled fewer women for further tests but detected the same number of cancers. • Reader type did not affect cancer detection rate, but consultant radiographers had a higher recall rate and lower positive predictive value than consultant radiologists, although this was not adjusted for length of experience.

IntroductionThe National Health Service (NHS) Breast Screening Programme aims to detect cancer earlier when treatment is more effective but can harm women by over diagnosing and overtreating cancers which would never have become symptomatic. As well as breast cancer, a spectrum of atypical epithelial proliferations (atypia) can also be detected as part of screening. This spectrum of changes, while not cancer, may mean that a woman is more likely to develop breast cancer in the future. Follow-up of atypia is not evidence based. We currently do not know which atypia should be detected to avoid future cancer. This study will explore how atypia develops into breast cancer in terms of number of women, time of cancer development, cancer type and severity, and whether this varies for different types of atypia.Methods and analysisThe Sloane cohort study began in April 2003 with ongoing data collection including atypia diagnosed through screening at screening units in the UK. The database for England has 3645 cases (24 September 2020) of epithelial atypia, with follow-up from 1 to 15 years. The outcomes include subsequent invasive breast cancer and the nature of subsequent cancer. Descriptive statistics will be produced. The observed rates of breast cancer at 1, 3 and 6 years for types of atypia will be reported with CIs, to enable comparison to women in the general population. Time to event methods will be used to describe the time to breast cancer diagnosis for the types of atypia, including flexible parametric modelling if appropriate. Patient representatives from Independent Cancer Patients’ Voice are included at every stage of the research.Ethics and disseminationThe study has received research ethics approval from the University of Warwick Biomedical and Scientific Research Ethics Committee (BSREC 10/20–21, 8 October 2020), Public Health England office for data release approvals (ODR1718_313) and approval from the English Breast Research Advisory Committee (BSPRAC_031). The findings will be disseminated to breast screening clinicians (via journal publication and conference presentation), to the NHS Breast Screening Programme to update their guidelines on how women with atypia should be followed up, and to the general public.

Peer reviewed: True, PURPOSE: The introduction of breast screening in the UK led to an increase in the detection of non-invasive breast neoplasia, predominantly ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a non-obligatory precursor of invasive breast cancer. The Sloane Project, a UK prospective cohort study of screen-detected non-invasive breast neoplasia, commenced in 2003 to evaluate the radiological assessment, surgical management, pathology, adjuvant therapy and outcomes for non-invasive breast neoplasia. Long-term follow-up and accurate data collection are essential to examine the clinical impact. Here, we describe the establishment, development and analytical processes for this large UK cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Women diagnosed with non-invasive breast neoplasia via the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) from 01 April 2003 are eligible, with a minimum age of 46 years. Diagnostic, therapeutic and follow-up data collected via proformas, complement date and cause of death from national data sources. Accrual for patients with DCIS ceased in 2012 but is ongoing for patients with epithelial atypia/in situ neoplasia, while follow-up for all continues long term. FINDINGS TO DATE: To date, patients within the Sloane cohort comprise one-third of those diagnosed with DCIS within the NHSBSP and are representative of UK practice. DCIS has a variable outcome and confirms the need for longer-term follow-up for screen-detected DCIS. However, the radiology and pathology features of DCIS can be used to inform patient management. We demonstrate validation of follow-up information collected from national datasets against traditional, manual methods. FUTURE PLANS: Conclusions derived from the Sloane Project are generalisable to women in the UK with screen-detected DCIS. The follow-up methodology may be extended to other UK cohort studies and routine clinical follow-up. Data from English patients entered into the Sloane Project are available on request to researchers under data sharing agreement. Annual follow-up data collection will continue for a minimum of 20 years.

Attending and receiving a result from screening can be an anxious process. Using an appropriate method to deliver screening results could improve communication and reduce negative outcomes for screening attendees. Screening programmes are increasingly communicating results by letter or telephone rather than in-person. We investigated the impact of communication methods on attendees.We systematically reviewed the literature on the communication methods used to deliver results in cancer screening programmes for women, focusing on screening attendee anxiety, understanding of results and preferences for results communication. We included qualitative and quantitative research. We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and Embase. Results were analysed using framework synthesis. 10,558 papers were identified with seven studies meeting the inclusion criteria.Several key ideas emerged from the synthesis including speed, accuracy of results, visual support, ability to ask questions, privacy of results location and managing expectations.Verbal communication methods (telephone and in-person) were preferred and facilitated greater understanding than written methods, although there was considerable variability in attendee preferences. Findings for anxiety were mixed, with no clear consensus on which method of communication might minimise attendee anxiety.The low number of identified studies and generally low quality evidence suggest we do not know the most appropriate communication methods in the delivery of cancer screening results. More research is needed to directly compare methods of results communication, focusing on what impact each method may have on screening attendees. Keywords: Mass screening, Communication, Mixed methods, Review, Psychology

ObjectiveTo evaluate the long term risks of invasive breast cancer and death from breast cancer after ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosed through breast screening.DesignPopulation based observational cohort study.SettingData from the NHS Breast Screening Programme and the National Cancer Registration and Analysis Service.ParticipantsAll 35 024 women in England diagnosed as having DCIS by the NHS Breast Screening Programme from its start in 1988 until March 2014.Main outcome measuresIncident invasive breast cancer and death from breast cancer.ResultsBy December 2014, 13 606 women had been followed for up to five years, 10 998 for five to nine years, 6861 for 10-14 years, 2620 for 15-19 years, and 939 for at least 20 years. Among these women, 2076 developed invasive breast cancer, corresponding to an incidence rate of 8.82 (95% confidence interval 8.45 to 9.21) per 1000 women per year and more than double that expected from national cancer incidence rates (ratio of observed rate to expected rate 2.52, 95% confidence interval 2.41 to 2.63). The increase started in the second year after diagnosis of DCIS and continued until the end of follow-up. In the same group of women, 310 died from breast cancer, corresponding to a death rate of 1.26 (1.13 to 1.41) per 1000 women per year and 70% higher than that expected from national breast cancer mortality rates (observed:expected ratio 1.70, 1.52 to 1.90). During the first five years after diagnosis of DCIS, the breast cancer death rate was similar to that expected from national mortality rates (observed:expected ratio 0.87, 0.69 to 1.10), but it then increased, with values of 1.98 (1.65 to 2.37), 2.99 (2.41 to 3.70), and 2.77 (2.01 to 3.80) in years five to nine, 10-14, and 15 or more after DCIS diagnosis. Among 29 044 women with unilateral DCIS undergoing surgery, those who had more intensive treatment (mastectomy, radiotherapy for women who had breast conserving surgery, and endocrine treatment in oestrogen receptor positive disease) and those with larger final surgical margins had lower rates of invasive breast cancer.ConclusionsTo date, women with DCIS detected by screening have, on average, experienced higher long term risks of invasive breast cancer and death from breast cancer than women in the general population during a period of at least two decades after their diagnosis. More intensive treatment and larger final surgical margins were associated with lower risks of invasive breast cancer.

Background Women with screen-detected invasive breast cancer who have macrometastatic disease on axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) are usually offered either surgical axillary node clearance (ANC) or axillary radiotherapy. These treatments can lead to significant complications for patients. The aim of this study was to identify a group of patients who may not require completion ANC. Methods Data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme between 1 April 2012 and 31 March 2017 were interrogated to identify women with invasive breast carcinoma and a single sentinel lymph node (SLN) with macrometastatic disease who subsequently proceeded to completion ANC. Univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to identify patients with a single positive SLN who had no further lymph node metastasis on ANC. Results Of the 2401 women included in the cohort, the presence of non-sentinel node disease was significantly affected by: the number of nodes obtained at SLNB (odds ratio (OR) 0.49 for retrieval of more than 1 node), invasive size of tumour (OR 1.63 for size greater than 20 mm), surgical treatment (OR 1.34 for mastectomy), human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2 status (OR 0.71 for HER2 positivity), and patient age (OR 1.10 for age less than 50 years; OR 1.46 for age greater than 70 years). Patients aged less than 70 years, with tumour size smaller than 2 cm, more than one node retrieved on SLNB, and who had breast-conserving surgery had a lower chance of positive non-sentinel nodes on completion ANC compared with other patients. Conclusion This study, of a purely screen-detected breast cancer cohort, identified a subset of patients who may be spared completion ANC in the event of a single axillary SLN with macrometastasis.

AIM To assess the impact of vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) on the management of B3 lesions in the England NHS Breast Screening Programme following an update of national guidance. A secondary aim was to investigate the histological features of malignancies resulting from upgrade of B3 lesions by either VAE or surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS The study population was all women recalled for assessment after breast screening who had a wide-bore needle biopsy with a B3 result over the period 01/04/2018 to 31/03/2019. Data were extracted from the National Breast Screening Service (NBSS) computer system at unit level. Women with a B3 result were split into those with and without atypia. The upgrade rates and histological features of malignancies in the different groups were analysed. RESULTS In total, 2,234,514 women attended for screening between 1/4/218 and 31/3/2019, 84,559 women were referred to assessment, and of those 40,037 women had a core biopsy resulting in 3,355 were B3 lesions (8.38%). Within these, 556 cancers were diagnosed, giving an upgrade rate of 16.57% (556/3,355). The upgrade for B3 lesions with atypia was significantly higher than for B3 lesions without atypia (29.1% versus 13.3%, p CONCLUSION The introduction of the new B3 guidelines has resulted in 73.8% of B3 lesions with atypia and 65.1% of B3 lesions with no atypia having VAE rather than surgery. The data highlights the importance of managing these indeterminate lesions appropriately with an overall upgrade rate of 16.57%.

IntroductionOne of the main harms from breast cancer screening is the anxiety caused by false positive results. Various factors may be associated with false-positive anxiety. One modifiable factor may be the method of communication used to deliver results. The aim of this study is to measure the effect on anxiety of receiving benign biopsy results in-person or by telephone.Methods and analysisThis is a multi-centre cluster randomised crossover trial in the English National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) involving repeated survey measures at four time points. Participants will be women of screening age who have a biopsy following a suspicious mammography result, who ultimately receive a benign or normal (B1) result. Centres will trial both telephone and in-person results on a month-by-month basis, being randomised to which communication method will be trialled first. Women will be blinded to the method of communication they will receive. The analysis will compare women who have received telephone results and women who have received in-person results. The primary outcome measure will be anxiety (measured by the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire) after receiving results, while controlling for baseline anxiety. Secondary outcome measures will include anxiety at 3 and 6 months post-results, understanding of results and patient preferences for how results are communicated. Qualitative telephone interviews will also be conducted to further explore women’s reasons for communication preferences. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated after initial separate analysis using the pillar integration process.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the Public Health England Breast Screening Programme Research Advisory Committee, (BSPRAC_0013, ODR1718_040) and the National Health Service Health Research Authority (HRA) West Midlands—Coventry & Warwickshire Research Ethics Committee (17/WM/0313). The findings from this study will be disseminated to key stakeholders within the NHSBSP and via academic publications.Trial registration numberISRCTN36997684Trial sponsorThis research is part of a PhD award and is funded by the Economic and Social Research Council Doctoral Training Centre at the University of Warwick and Public Health England. The sponsor for this research is Jane Prewett (sponsorship@warwick.ac.uk).

Purpose To report the impact of changing from screen-film mammography to digital mammography (DM) in a large organized national screening program. Materials and Methods A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected annual screening data from 2009-2010 to 2015-2016 for the 80 facilities of the English National Health Service Breast Cancer Screening Program, together with estimates of DM usage for three time periods, enabled the effect of DM to be measured in a study of 11.3 million screening episodes in women aged 45-70 years (mean age, 59 years). Regression models were used to estimate percentage and absolute change in detection rates due to DM. Results The overall cancer detection rate was 14% greater with DM (P < .001). There were higher rates of detection of grade 1 and 2 invasive cancers (both ductal and lobular), but no change in the detection of grade 3 invasive cancers. The recall rate was almost unchanged by the introduction of DM. At prevalent (first) screening episodes for women aged 45-52 years, DM increased the overall detection rate by 19% (P < .001) and for incident screening episodes in women aged 53-70 years by 13% (P < .001). Conclusion The overall cancer detection rate was 14% greater with digital mammography with no change in recall rates and without confounding by changes in other factors. There was a substantially higher detection of grade 1 and grade 2 invasive cancers, including both ductal and lobular cancers, but no change in the detection of grade 3 invasive cancers. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by C.I. Lee and J.M. Lee in this issue.

Summary Background The value of screen detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a matter of controversy. At present, the extent to which the diagnosis and treatment of DCIS could prevent the occurrence of invasive breast cancer in the future is not clear. We sought to estimate the association between detection of DCIS at screening and invasive interval cancers subsequent to the relevant screen. Methods We obtained aggregate data for screen-detected cancers from 84 local screening units within 11 regional Quality Assurance Reference Centres in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland from the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Data for DCIS diagnoses were obtained for women aged 50–64 years who were invited to and attended mammographic breast screening from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2007 (4 screening years). Patient-level data for interval cancer arising in the 36 months after each of these were analysed by Poisson regression with invasive interval cancer screen detection rate as the outcome variable; DCIS detection frequencies were fitted first as a continuous and then as a categorical variable. We repeated this analysis after adjustment with both small size and high-grade invasive screen-detected cancers. Findings We analysed data for 5 243 658 women and on interval cancers occurring in the 36 months after the relevant screen. The average frequency of DCIS detected at screening was 1·60 per 1000 women screened (median 1·50 [unit range 0·54–3·56] per 1000 women). There was a significant negative association of screen-detected DCIS cases with the rate of invasive interval cancers (Poisson regression coefficient −0·084 [95% CI −0·13 to −0·03]; p=0·002). 90% of units had a DCIS detection frequency within the range of 1·00 to 2·22 per 1000 women; in these units, for every three screen-detected cases of DCIS, there was one fewer invasive interval cancer in the next 3 years. This association remained after adjustment for numbers of small screen-detected invasive cancers and for numbers of grade 3 invasive screen-detected cancers. Interpretation The association between screen-detected DCIS and subsequent invasive interval cancers suggests that detection and treatment of DCIS is worthwhile in prevention of future invasive disease. Funding UK Department of Health Policy Research Programme and NHS Cancer Screening Programmes.

ObjectiveTo record how breast screening centres in England deliver all biopsy results (cancer/non-cancer) from the breast assessment visit.DesignOnline survey of 63 of 79 breast screening centres in England from all regions (East Midlands, East of England, London, North East Yorkshire & Humber, North West, South East, South West, West Midlands). The survey contained quantitative measures of frequency for telephoning biopsy results (routinely, occasionally or never) and optional qualitative free-text responses. Surveys were completed by a staff member from each centre.ResultsThere were no regional trends in the use of telephone results services, (X² (14, n=63)=11.55, p=0.64), Centres who telephoned results routinely did not deliver results sooner than centres who deliver results in-person (X² (16, n=63)=12.76, p=0.69).When delivering cancer results, 76.2% of centres never telephone results and 23.8% of centres occasionally telephone results. No centres reported delivering cancer results routinely by telephone. Qualitative content analysis suggests that cancer results are only telephoned at the patient request and under exceptional circumstances.When delivering non-cancer results, 12.7% of centres never telephoned results, 38.1% occasionally telephoned results and 49.2% routinely telephoned results. Qualitative content analysis revealed different processes for delivering telephone results, including patient choice and scheduling an in-person results appointment for all women attending breast assessment, then ringing non-cancer results unexpectedly ahead of this prebooked appointment.ConclusionsIn the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, breast assessment results that are cancer are routinely delivered in-person. However, non-cancer breast assessment results are often routinely delivered by telephone, despite breast screening policy recommendations. More research is needed to understand the impact of telephoning results on women attending breast assessment, particularly women who receive a non-cancer result. Future research should also consider how women themselves might prefer to receive their results.

Background The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains uncertain. The risk factors for the development of invasive cancer in unresected DCIS are unclear. Methods Women diagnosed with DCIS on needle biopsy after 1997 who did not undergo surgical resection for ≥1 year after diagnosis were identified by breast centres and the cancer registry and outcomes were reviewed. Results Eighty-nine women with DCIS diagnosed 1998–2010 were identified. The median age at diagnosis was 75 (range 44–94) years with median follow-up (diagnosis to death, invasive disease or last review) of 59 (12–180) months. Twenty-nine women (33%) developed invasive breast cancer after a median interval of 45 (12–144) months. 14/29 (48%) with high grade, 10/31 (32%) with intermediate grade and 3/17 (18%) with low grade DCIS developed invasive cancer after median intervals of 38, 60 and 51 months. The cumulative incidence of invasion was significantly higher in high grade DCIS than other grades (p = .0016, log-rank test). Invasion was more frequent in lesions with calcification as the predominant feature (23/50 v. 5/25; p = .042) and in younger women (p = .0002). Endocrine therapy was associated with a lower rate of invasive breast cancer (p = .048). Conclusions High cytonuclear grade, mammographic microcalcification, young age and lack of endocrine therapy were risk factors for DCIS progression to invasive cancer. Surgical excision of high grade DCIS remains the treatment of choice. Given the uncertain long-term natural history of non-high grade DCIS, the option of active surveillance of women with this condition should be offered within a clinical trial.

Background\ud Older women are less likely to have surgery for operable breast cancer. This population-based study examines operation rates by age and identifies groups which present with early or late disease.\ud \ud Methods\ud 37 000 cancer registrations for 2007 were combined with Hospital Episode Statistics comorbidity data for England. Operation rates were examined by age, ethnicity, deprivation, comorbidity, screen-detection, tumour size, grade and nodal status. Early and late presentation were correlated with Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) groups and tumour size.\ud \ud Results\ud The proportion of women not having surgery increased from 7–10% at ages 35–69 to 82% from age 90. From age 70, the proportion not having surgery rose by an average of 3.1% per year of age. Women with a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of ?1 (which increased with age), with tumours >50 mm or who were node positive, were less likely to have surgery. Although women aged 70–79 were more likely to have larger tumours, their tumours were also more likely to have an excellent or good NPI (p < 0.001). Good prognosis tumours were more likely to be screen-detected, and less likely in women aged 0–39, the deprived and certain ethnic groups (p < 0.02).\ud \ud Conclusions\ud From age 70 there is an increasing failure to operate for breast cancer. Younger women and certain ethnic groups presented with more advanced tumours. Older women had larger tumours which were otherwise of good prognosis, and this would not account for the failure to operate which may in part be related to comorbidity in this age group.

The NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) was started in 1988 and is a large, organised cancer screening programme. It is delivered by 80 services across England and screens over 2 million women each year. As a screening programme, it must balance the detection of cancers against possible harm to women who do not have cancer. The NHSBSP was therefore designed with detailed information gathering and performance metrics right from the start. In this review paper, we examine how performance metrics in screening mammography have improved the national screening programme and the further developments and challenges that are expected in the years to come.

OBJECTIVES To determine whether surgeon case volume and Unit case volume affected specific recognized key performance indicators (KPIs) of breast cancer surgical management. BACKGROUND An increasing body of evidence suggests that a higher standard of cancer care, demonstrated by improved outcomes, is provided in high-volume units or by high-volume surgeons. The volume-outcome relationship pertaining to screen-detected breast cancers has yet to be thoroughly established and remains a pertinent issue in view of the debate surrounding breast cancer screening. METHODS The study population comprised all women with a new screen diagnosed breast cancer between 2004-2005 and 2009-2010. Surgeons' mean annual patient volumes were calculated and grouped as very low ( 50). The effect of breast screening unit volume was also evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed using Minitab V16.0 software (State College, PA) and R V2.13.0. RESULTS There were 81,416 patients aged 61 (±6.8) years treated by 682 surgeons across 82 units. There were 209 very low-, 126 low-, 295 medium-, and 51 high-volume surgeons. The proportion of patients managed by very low-, low-, medium-, and high-volume surgeons was 1.2%, 6.9%, 65.5%, and 25.7%, respectively. Patients managed by high-volume surgeons were more likely to have breast-conserving surgery (BCS) than those managed by low-volume surgeons (P < 0.001). There was a higher proportion of sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) performed by high-volume surgeons in invasive cancers (P = 0.005). High-volume units performed more BCS and SLNB than low-volume units (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Even in a setting with established quality control measures (KPIs) surgeon and unit volume have potent influences on initial patient management and treatment.

Objectives To measure whether uptake of breast cancer screening was affected by the publication of the Marmot Review and associated press coverage. Setting Eight NHS breast screening centres in the West Midlands of the UK. Methods Uptake of breast cancer screening invitations was compared in the week before and after the Marmot review publication. All 12,023 women invited for screening between 23 October 2012 and 5 November 2012 were included. A mixed effects model of the predictors of screening uptake (on date invited, or within 21 days) was created. Predictors considered for inclusion were whether the allocated screening appointment was before or after publication of the review, population factors (age, index of multiple deprivation income domain by quintile, previous attendance), and interaction terms. Results Uptake decreased after publication of the review from 65% to 62% (OR = 0.87 95%CI = 0.80–0.94), but a similar decrease was seen for the same dates on the previous year (OR = 0.85 95%CI = 0.78–0.93). Odds of attending screening were lower for women in the most deprived (uptake = 49%, OR = 0.54, 95%CI = 0.46–0.62) in comparison with the least deprived quintile (uptake = 71%). Odds of attendance also increased if the woman had ever previously attended (OR 3.9 95% CI 3.5–4.4), and decreased with each year of increasing age (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.96–0.97). There were no interactions between any of the other predictors and whether the appointment was before or after publication of the Marmot review. Conclusion No change in uptake of breast cancer screening above normal seasonal variation was detected after publication of the Marmot review.

A co-ordinated approach was adopted to monitor practice standards among clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) in West Midlands breast screening assessment nursing teams. A regional working party was assembled and a patient satisfaction survey was produced. Results of the survey show that for women attending for breast screening assessment, interaction with a CNS is perceived to be highly beneficial. Contact points vary with local practice, but the majority of women had contact with a CNS at some point during the assessment process for support and information. The results of the survey are used as an integral part of the quality assurance process in relation to CNS provision in the West Midlands. Services should aim to ensure that sufficient CNSs are available for women attending breast screening assessment centres.

Importance Interpreting screening mammograms is a difficult repetitive task that can result in missed cancers and false-positive recalls. In the United Kingdom, 2 film readers independently evaluate each mammogram to search for signs of cancer and examine digital mammograms in batches. However, a vigilance decrement (reduced detection rate with time on task) has been observed in similar settings.\ud \ud Objective To determine the effect of changing the order for the second film reader of batches of screening mammograms on rates of breast cancer detection.\ud \ud Design, Setting, and Participants A multicenter, double-blind, cluster randomized clinical trial conducted at 46 specialized breast screening centers from the National Health Service Breast Screening Program in England for 1 year (all between December 20, 2012, and November 3, 2014). Three hundred sixty readers participated (mean, 7.8 readers per center)—186 radiologists, 143 radiography advanced practitioners, and 31 breast clinicians, all fully qualified to report mammograms in the NHS breast screening program.\ud \ud Interventions The 2 readers examined each batch of digital mammograms in the same order in the control group and in the opposite order to one another in the intervention group.\ud \ud Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was cancer detection rate; secondary outcomes were rates of recall and disagreements between readers.\ud \ud Results Among 1 194 147 women (mean age, 59.3; SD, 7.49) who had screening mammograms (596 642 in the intervention group; 597 505 in the control group), the images were interpreted in 37 688 batches (median batch size, 35; interquartile range [IQR]; 16-46), with each reader interpreting a median of 176 batches (IQR, 96-278). After completion of all subsequent diagnostic tests, a total of 10 484 cases (0.88%) of breast cancer were detected. There was no significant difference in cancer detection rate with 5272 cancers (0.88%) detected in the intervention group vs 5212 cancers (0.87%) detected in the control group (difference, 0.01% points; 95% CI, −0.02% to 0.04% points; recall rate, 24 681 [4.14%] vs 24 894 [4.17%]; difference, −0.03% points; 95% CI, −0.10% to 0.04% points; or rate of reader disagreements, 20 471 [3.43%] vs 20 793 [3.48%]; difference, −0.05% points; 95% CI, −0.11% to 0.02% points).\ud \ud Conclusions and Relevance Interpretation of batches of mammograms by qualified screening mammography readers using a different order vs the same order for the second reading resulted in no significant difference in rates of detection of breast cancer.\ud \ud Trial Registration isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN46603370

Background: The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) rose rapidly when the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) started in 1988. Some authorities consider that this represents both over-diagnosis and over-treatment. We report long-term follow-up of DCIS diagnosed in the first 10 years (April 1988 to March 1999) of the West Midlands NHSBSP. Methods: 840 noninvasive breast cancers were recorded on the national breast screening computer system. Following exclusions, and thorough case note and pathology review, 700 DCIS cases were identified for follow-up. Results: After a median follow-up of 183 (range 133 to 259) months, 102 (14.6%) first local recurrences were identified, 49 (48%) were invasive. Median time to first noninvasive recurrence was 15 months, and 60 months for invasive recurrence. Median time to invasive recurrence was 76 months from initially high-grade DCIS, and 131 months from low/intermediate grade DCIS. For the seven women, presenting with metastasis as their first event, the median time was 82 (range 15 to 188) months. The cumulative proportion developing recurrence at 180 months was twice as high as at 60 months. Interpretation: Short-term follow-up of patients diagnosed with DCIS will miss significant numbers of events, especially invasive local recurrences.

Background: We analysed 10-year survival data in 19 411 women aged 50–64 years diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in the West Midlands region of the United Kingdom. The aim was to estimate the survival advantage seen in cases that were screen detected compared with those diagnosed symptomatically and attribute this to shifts in prognostic variables or survival differences specific to prognostic categories. Methods: We studied tumour size, histological grade and the Nottingham Prognostic Index in very narrow categories and investigated the distribution of these prognostic factors within screen-detected and symptomatic tumours. We also adjusted for lead time bias. Results: The unadjusted 10-year breast cancer survival in screen-detected cases was 85.5% and in symptomatic cases 62.8% after adjustment for lead time bias, survival in the screen-detected cases was 79.3%. Within narrow categories of prognostic variables, survival differences were small, indicating that the majority of the survival advantage of screen detection is due to differences in the distributions of size and node status. Conclusion: Our results suggested that a combination of lead time with size and node status in 10 categories explained almost all (97%) of the survival advantage. Only a small proportion remained to be explained by biological differences, manifested as length bias or overdiagnosis.

Contains fulltext : 98249.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: It has been observed that screen-detected breast cancers have a better prognosis than symptomatic tumors, even after taking pathological tumor attributes into account. This has led to the hypothesis that screen-detected tumors are substantially biologically different from symptomatic cancers. METHODS: The pathology and survival by detection mode was investigated in 21,382 breast cancers diagnosed in women aged 50-64 years in the West Midlands, United Kingdom, between 1988 and 2004. Tumor attributes were compared using chi-square tests and logistic regression. Survival was analyzed using Cox regression. RESULTS: Screen-detected cancers were significantly smaller, better differentiated, and less likely to be node-positive than symptomatic cancers (P < .001 in all cases). In addition, a higher proportion of screen-detected cancers were hormone receptor-positive, and a higher proportion were tubular carcinomas (P < .001). Survival was substantially better in screen-detected breast cancers (86% at 10 yearsvs 70% for interval cancers and 58% for cancers in women unexposed to screening). Adjustment for age, tumor size, nodal status, grade, histological type, and year of diagnosis accounted for 64% (interval cancers) and 68% (unexposed women) of these survival differences, respectively. Overall survival improved with time. Approximately half of this improvement was due to the increase over time in the proportion of tumors that were screen-detected. CONCLUSION: The majority of the difference in prognosis between screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancers is due to the differences in routinely measured pathological features (size, type, grade, and nodal status), leaving a small residual difference to be accounted for by other biological differences.

Objectives In an attempt to improve breast cancer screening uptake and coverage, persistent non-offenders in the Heart of Birmingham Teaching Primary Care Trust were included in an invitation management initiative. Methods Persistent non-attenders were identified in routine screening lists. Phone contact was attempted or a home visit was made. If the case was not resolved, a second appointment was made and further phone calls and home visits were attempted. Results Of 548 persistent non-attenders identified, 228 (42%) declined screening, 171 (31%) attended, 72 (13%) had moved away or died, 11 (2%) were recently screened or under care for other conditions. Sixty-six cases (12%) remained unresolved. Fourteen women opted to be permanently withdrawn from the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). Twenty-four women had a negative experience of breast cancer screening (defaulted, recalled for assessment, recalled for technical reasons). No malignancies were found. A total of 1375 phone calls and 230 home visits were attempted. Uptake would have been 62.2% if none of the persistent non-attenders included in the initiative had attended for screening. With the initiative, uptake of breast cancer screening was increased to 65.3%. Conclusions Phone calls and home visits resulted in only a moderate increase in breast cancer screening uptake. The initiative encouraged nervous attenders who were reassured about the screening process. However, more women declined screening than were screened and the initiative made it easier for women to request to be permanently withdrawn from the NHSBSP.

Contains fulltext : 79506.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Closed access) BACKGROUND: Evidence of the impact of breast screening is limited by biases inherent in non-randomised studies and often by lack of complete population data. We address this by estimating the effect of screen detection on cause-specific fatality in breast cancer, corrected for all potential biases, using population cancer registry data. METHODS: Subjects (N = 26,766) comprised all breast cancers notified to the West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit and diagnosed in women aged 50-74, from 1988 to 2004. These included 10,100 screen-detected and 15,862 symptomatic breast cancers (6,009 women with interval cancers and 9,853 who had not attended screening). Our endpoint was survival to death from breast cancer. We estimated the relative risk (RR) of 10-year cause-specific fatality (screen-detected compared to symptomatic cancers) correcting for lead time bias and performing sensitivity analyses for length bias. To exclude self-selection bias, survival analyses were also performed with interval cancers as the comparator symptomatic women. FINDINGS: Uncorrected RR associated with screen-detection was 0.34 (95% CI 0.31-0.37). Correcting for lead time, RR was 0.49 (95% CI 0.45-0.53); length bias analyses gave a range of RR corrected for both phenomena of 0.49-0.59, with a median of 0.51. Self-selection bias-corrected estimates yielded a median RR of 0.68. INTERPRETATION: After adjusting for various potential biases, women with screen-detected breast cancer have a substantial survival advantage over those with symptomatic breast cancer.

Use of radiotherapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) varies according to country, precedent and prejudice. Results from a preliminary analysis of the data available within the UK Sloane Project can be appreciated in the context of the uncertainty concerning the selection of adjuvant RT following BCS for DCIS. There was a marked geographical variation in the use of RT within the United Kingdom. However, overall, patients with DCIS treated with BCS were significantly more likely to have RT planned (and given) if they had large (or =15 mm), intermediate or high-grade tumours or if central comedo-type necrosis was present. Unexpectedly, margin width did not appear to have a significant effect on the decision-making process. However, the Van Nuys Prognostic Index did significantly affect the chances of getting planned RT in the univariate analysis, suggesting that clinicians may be starting to use this scoring system in routine practice to assist in decision making.

It is well known that socio-economic status is a strong predictor of screening attendance, with women of higher socioeconomic status more likely to attend breast cancer screening. We investigated whether socio-economic status was related to the detection of cancer at breast screening centres. In two separate projects we combined UK data from the population census, the screening information systems, and the cancer registry. Five years of data from all 81 screening centres in the UK was collected. Only women who had previously attended screening were included. The study was given ethical approval by the University of Warwick Biomedical Research Ethics committee reference SDR-232-07- 2012. Generalised linear models with a log-normal link function were fitted to investigate the relationship between predictors and the age corrected cancer detection rate at each centre. We found that screening centres serving areas with lower average socio-economic status had lower cancer detection rates, even after correcting for the age distribution of the population. This may be because there may be a correlation between higher socio-economic status and some risk factors for breast cancer such as nullparity (never bearing children). When applying adjustment for age, ethnicity and socioeconomic status of the population screened (rather than simply age) we found that SDR can change by up to 0.11.

Objectives: To illustrate the ability of the West Midlands breast screening status algorithm to assign a screening status to women with malignant breast cancer, and its uses as a quality assurance and audit tool. Methods: Breast cancers diagnosed between the introduction of the National Health Service [NHS] Breast Screening Programme and 31 March 2001 were obtained from the West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit (WMCIU). Screen-detected tumours were identified via breast screening units, and the remaining cancers were assigned to one of eight screening status categories. Multiple primaries and recurrences were excluded. Results: A screening status was assigned to 14,680 women (96% of the cohort examined), 110 cancers were not registered at the WMCIU and the cohort included 120 screen-detected recurrences. Conclusions: The West Midlands breast screening status algorithm is a robust simple tool which can be used to derive data to evaluate the efficacy and impact of the NHS Breast Screening Programme.

Despite surgical removal of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), recurrences still occur. This retrospective cohort study evaluated the risk of invasive recurrence following surgery and investigated factors which may be predictive of recurrence. We specifically investigated invasive recurrence with respect to mode of detection of DCIS. Patients whose DCIS was detected outside of the NHS Breast Screening Programme have a higher risk of subsequent ipsilateral invasive breast cancer than those whose DCIS is detected through screening. There is no significant difference in risk of subsequent contralateral invasive recurrence according to mode of detection.

Breast cancer in the UK resident population of South Asian ethnicity has been lower than that in indigenous women. Leicester has a large South Asian population and a breast cancer unit with comprehensive data on diagnosed cancers. This study analysed the annual incidence of new breast cancer diagnoses in females from 1998 to 2009 to determine any changes in recent years.Ethnicity was known in over 98% of cases. Population denominators were based on published figures for 2001 and 2011, projected back to 1998. Age-adjusted directly standardised incidence rates were determined by ethnicity and broken down by invasive status and screening classification. Incidence rates were analysed using logistic regression in order to identify statistically significant effects of age, ethnicity, deprivation and year of diagnosis. Interactions with invasive status and screening classification were also investigated.At the start of the study period South Asian incidence was estimated to be 45% of that of the white population (p0.001); by the end of the period the difference was still significant (p=0.022) but smaller, at 17%.South Asians should no longer be considered at low risk of breast cancer.

1570Background: The degree of over-diagnosis and over-treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains contentious. Hypotheses from retrospective data were tested in a prospective, population-based study. Methods: A prospective longitudinal cohort of 12,838 women diagnosed through a population-based national breast screening program accrued 2003-2012 with proforma for imaging, surgery, pathology and adjuvant therapy. Follow-up was linked to national databases and case note review to analyse patterns of care, recurrence and mortality. Results: Data was complete for 9,972/12,838 (78%) women (mean age 60 years; range 46-87) with median follow up 62 months (range 6-116). Breast conservation (BCS) was definitive surgery for 7,028 (70.5%) women; use increased with older age (CHI2 380, 6 df p < 0.001). Mastectomy (Mx; n = 2,944) was associated with higher grade DCIS (CHI2 19.31, 2 df P < 0.001), larger size (CHI2 203.9, 5 df P < 0.001) and comedo necrosis (CHI2 9.1, 1 df P = 0.003). For patients undergoing ...

Objectives: To examine whether rate of reoperation after breast conserving surgery is associated with patients’ characteristics and investigate whether reoperation rates vary among English NHS trusts.Design: Cohort study using patient level data from hospital episode statistics.Setting: English NHS trusts.Participants: Adult women who had breast conserving surgery between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2008.Main outcome measure: Reoperation rates after primary breast conserving surgery within 3 months, adjusted using logistic regression for tumour type, age, comorbidity, and socioeconomic deprivation. Tumours were grouped by whether a carcinoma in situ component was coded at the time of the primary breast conserving surgery.Results: 55 297 women had primary breast conserving surgery in 156 NHS trusts during the three year period. 11 032 (20.0%, 95% confidence interval 19.6% to 20.3%) women had at least one reoperation. 10 212 (18.5%, 18.2% to 18.8%) had one reoperation only; of these, 5943 (10.7%, 10.5% to 11.0%) had another breast conserving procedure and 4269 (7.7%, 7.5% to 7.9%) had a mastectomy. Of the 45 793 women with isolated invasive disease, 8229 (18.0%) had at least one reoperation. In comparison, 2803 (29.5%) of the 9504 women with carcinoma in situ had at least one reoperation (adjusted odds ratio 1.9, 95% confidence interval 1.8 to 2.0). Substantial differences were found in the adjusted reoperation rates among the NHS trusts (10th and 90th centiles 12.2% and 30.2%).Conclusion: One in five women who had breast conserving surgery in England had a reoperation. Reoperation was nearly twice as likely when the tumour had a carcinoma in situ component coded. Women should be informed of this reoperation risk when deciding on the type of surgical treatment of their breast cancer.

Background: Social inequalities in breast cancer survival are smaller when the cancer is screen-detected. We examined survival from screen-detected and non screen-detected breast cancer by ethnicity and deprivation. Methods: Cancer registry data for 20 283 women aged 50–70 years, diagnosed between 1989–2011 and invited for screening, were linked with screening and ethnicity data. We examined Asian, Black and White groups, less deprived and middle/more deprived women. Net survival was estimated using ethnic- and deprivation-specific life tables. Estimates were corrected for lead-time bias and over-diagnosis. Results: Net survival varied by screening history. No significant differences in survival were found by ethnicity. Five-year net survival was 90.0% (95% CI, 89.3–90.8%) in less deprived groups and 86.7% (85.9–87.4%) among middle/more deprived women. Screening benefitted all ethnic and both deprivation groups. Whether screen-detected or not, more deprived women had significantly poorer outcomes: 5-year net survival was 78.0% (76.7–79.2%) for deprived women who were not screen-detected compared with 94.0% (93.1–95.1%) for less deprived women who were screen-detected. Conclusions: The three ethnic groups differed little in their breast cancer survival. Although screening confers a survival benefit to all, there are still wide disparities in survival by deprivation. More needs to be done to determine what underlies these differences and tackle them.

Male breast carcinoma is a rare condition. Few male breast cancer-specific epidemiological or clinical trial data are available - our understanding of male breast cancer thus comes from studies of female breast cancer, painting an inaccurate picture when it comes to determining contributing factors. Clinicians report an increase in diagnoses of male breast cancer but this has not been formally reported. We therefore undertook a review of data obtained from four western nations: England, Scotland, Canada and Australia. When adjusted for age, this review clearly showed an increase in the incidence of male breast cancer over a 15-year period. Reasons for the increased incidence are discussed in the context of suggested risk factors such as BRCA2 and lifestyle changes over the past few decades. The clinical management of male breast carcinoma is considered, in particular the potential role of aromatase inhibitors and fulvestrant and targeting pathways involving prolactin and androgen receptor.

During the changeover from analogue to digital screening in the UK, reassurance is needed to confirm that the outcomes with digital are equal to or better than analogue screening.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to develop and validate a prognostication model to predict overall and breast cancer specific survival for women treated for early breast cancer in the UK. METHODS: Using the Eastern Cancer Registration and Information Centre (ECRIC) dataset, information was collated for 5,694 women who had surgery for invasive breast cancer in East Anglia from 1999 to 2003. Breast cancer mortality models for oestrogen receptor (ER) positive and ER negative tumours were derived from these data using Cox proportional hazards, adjusting for prognostic factors and mode of cancer detection (symptomatic versus screen-detected). An external dataset of 5,468 patients from the West Midlands Cancer Intelligence Unit (WMCIU) was used for validation. RESULTS: Differences in overall actual and predicted mortality were

BACKGROUND: Data collection for screen-detected breast cancer in the United Kingdom is fully funded, which has led to improvements in clinical practice. However, data on symptomatic cancer are deficient, and the aim of this project was to monitor the current practice. METHODS: A data set was designed together with surrogate outcome measures to reflect best practice. Data from cancer registries initially required the consent of clinicians, but in the third year anonymised data were available. RESULTS: The quality of data improved, but this varied by region and only a third of the cases were validated by clinicians. Regional variations in mastectomy rates were identified, and one-third of patients who underwent conservative surgery for the treatment invasive breast cancer were not recorded as receiving radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: National data are essential to ensure that all patients receive appropriate treatment for breast cancer, but variations still exist in the United Kingdom and further improvement in data capture is required.

Aims: To investigate the variations in follow-up practice for screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in the UK. Methods: A questionnaire enquiring about follow-up practice and the perceived value of clinical follow-up after surgery for screen-detected DCIS was sent to the 74 UK screening centres participating in the Sloane Project. Results: Responses were received from 66 hospitals serving 54 screening centres. These demonstrate wide variations in practice. Clinical follow-up duration ranges from 1 year to indefinite, with the frequency of visits from three-monthly to annually. Formal mammographic follow-up duration ranges from none to indefinite. Mammographic frequency ranges from 1 to 2 years. Follow-up varies according to factors such as size and grade of disease and margin status in 23 units and according to whether adjuvant therapy is given in 23. Seven hospitals perform mammography of reconstructed breasts. Thirty-one centres consider clinical follow-up of DCIS to be of value or limited value whereas 28 consider it to be of little or no value. Conclusions: There is no consensus with regard to the duration and frequency of follow-up for screen-detected DCIS, the contribution of predictive and treatment factors, the use of mammography of the reconstructed breast or the perceived value of clinical follow-up. Published guidelines show no consensus. Multidisciplinary teams involved in the care of women with screen-detected non-invasive cancer should contribute to audits such as the Sloane Project in order to determine the most effective and efficient ways to treat and follow up these patients.

The present study aims to assess the influence of lesion size on the radiological features of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in Sloane Project cases. Cases where calcification was present mammographically, and histological grade and size were available, were included. Calcific DCIS was classified radiologically as casting/linear, granular/irregular or punctate. The pathology dataset included tumour grade and size. Correlations were sought between the radiological and pathological findings and significance assessed. A total of 1,783 cases were included. Of these, 1,128 women, 485 women and 170 women had high-grade, intermediate-grade and low-grade DCIS, respectively. Casting calcification was more frequently seen the higher the tumour grade; occurring in 58% of high-grade, 38% of intermediate-grade and 26% of low-grade cases, respectively (P 30 mm) low-grade lesions (46%). Lesion size has a strong influence on the radiological features of calcific DCIS; small high-grade lesions often show no casting calcifications, while casting calcifications are seen in approaching one-half of large low-grade lesions. The radiological appearances alone cannot be used to predict the histological grade of DCIS.