Search

The effect of the implementation of the Dutch breast cancer screening programme during 1990-1997 on the incidence rates of breast cancer, particularly advanced breast cancer, was analysed according to stage at diagnosis in seven regions, where no screening took place before 1990. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided detailed data on breast cancer incidence in 1989-1997 by tumour stage, age and region. Annual age-adjusted incidence rates of all breast cancers and advanced cancers, defined as large tumours T2+ with lymph node and/or distant metastases, were compared with rates in 1989. In general, breast cancer incidence rose strongly in the early 1990s, especially in the age category 50-69 years (estimated annual percentage change (EAPC) 4.25; 95% CI 1.70, 6.86). The increase was mainly due to the increase in small T1 cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ. However, in women aged 50-69, advanced cancer incidence rates showed a significant decline by 12.1% in 1997 compared with 1989 (EAPC -2.14, 95% CI -3.47, -0.80), followed by a breast cancer mortality reduction of similar size after approximately 2 years. We confirm that breast cancer screening initially leads to a temporary strong increase in the breast cancer incidence, which is followed by a significant decrease in advanced diseases in the women invited for screening. It is evident that breast cancer screening contributes to a reduction in advanced breast cancers and breast cancer mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Insight into the aggressiveness of potential breast cancers found in screening may optimize recall decisions. Specific growth rate (SGR), measured on mammograms, may provide valuable prognostic information. This study addresses the association of SGR with prognostic factors and overall survival in patients with invasive carcinoma of no special type (NST) from a screened population., Methods: In this historic cohort study, 293 women with NST were identified from all participants in the Nijmegen screening program (2003-2007). Information on clinicopathological factors was retrieved from patient files and follow-up on vital status through municipalities. On consecutive mammograms, tumor volumes were estimated. After comparing five growth functions, SGR was calculated using the best-fitting function. Regression and multivariable survival analyses described associations between SGR and prognostic factors as well as overall survival., Results: Each one standard deviation increase in SGR was associated with an increase in the Nottingham prognostic index by 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.46]. Each one standard deviation increase in SGR increased the odds of a tumor with an unfavorable subtype (based on histologic grade and hormone receptors; odds ratio 2.14 [95% CI: 1.45-3.15]) and increased the odds of diagnosis as an interval cancer (versus screen-detected; odds ratio 1.57 [95% CI: 1.20-2.06]). After a median of 12.4 years of follow-up, 78 deaths occurred. SGR was not associated with overall survival (hazard ratio 1.12 [95% CI: 0.87-1.43])., Conclusions: SGR may indicate prognostically relevant differences in tumor aggressiveness if serial mammograms are available. A potential association with cause-specific survival could not be determined and is of interest for future research., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objectives: To estimate the incidence of ovarian cancer (OC) and endometrial cancer (EC) separately, as well as double cancers diagnosed in the same calendar year, and to relate the occurrences to histological subtype., Study Design: All cases of epithelial OC and EC diagnosed in the Netherlands in 1989-2009 were related to population data. Histologically specific associations were made using the ratio of observed and expected incidence numbers, calculated with age-specific incidence rates., Results: 25,489 OC and 32,729 EC were analyzed, and 649 OC/EC. Life-time risks for OC and EC were 1.8% and 2.4%. Among OC, adenocarcinoma (18%) and serous cancers (33%) were the most prevalent subtypes. In EC, adenocarcinoma (39%) and endometrioid cancer (37%) were highest, with hardly any serous cancers. The observed incidence of OC/EC was 50-fold higher than expected (95% CI, 46-54). For patients aged <55years, the O/E ratio was 274, for the elderly 32, both findings are significant. Of the 2345 OC endometrioid subtype, 294 had EC (12.5%), whereas 1.1 was expected. In EC patients, no particular histological subtype was distinguished with a highly elevated occurrence of OC. The 680 serous EC patients had 11 double cancers (1.6%), of which 8 with the ovarian serous subtype., Conclusion: Strong relationships exist between malignancies in the ovary and a second primary malignancy in the endometrium, especially for the endometrioid subtype of ovarian cancer. Viewed from the endometrial site, no special subtype was noted, and the influence of endometrial serous adenocarcinoma in developing serous OC is not plausible., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the MIRROR study, pN0(i + ) and pN1mi were associated with reduced 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) compared with pN0. Nodal status (N-status) was assessed after central pathology review and restaging according to the sixth AJCC classification. We addressed the impact of pathology review., Patients and Methods: Early favorable primary breast cancer patients, classified pN0, pN0(i + ), or pN1(mi) by local pathologists after sentinel node procedure, were included. We assessed the impact of pathology review on N-status (n = 2842) and 5-year DFS for those without adjuvant therapy (n = 1712)., Results: In all, 22% of the 1082 original pN0 patients was upstaged. Of the 623 original pN0(i + ) patients, 1% was downstaged, 26% was upstaged. Of 1137 patients staged pN1mi, 15% was downstaged, 11% upstaged. Originally, 5-year DFS was 85% for pN0, 74% for pN0(i + ), and 73% for pN1mi; HR 1.70 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-2.27] and HR 1.57 (95% CI 1.16-2.13), respectively, compared with pN0. By review staging, 5-year DFS was 86% for pN0, 77% for pN0(i + ), 77% for pN1mi, and 74% for pN1 + ., Conclusion: Pathology review changed the N-classification in 24%, mainly upstaging, with potentially clinical relevance for individual patients. The association of isolated tumor cells and micrometastases with outcome remained unchanged. Quality control should include nodal breast cancer staging.

Background: The cost-effectiveness of adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with low-risk breast cancer and nodal isolated tumor cells or micrometastases is unknown., Patients and Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant systemic therapy was carried out using the costs per 1% event prevented after 5 years of follow-up as incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Secondary objective was to establish when adjuvant systemic therapy becomes cost saving. Patients included in the MIRROR study with isolated tumor cells or micrometastases who had a complete 5-year follow-up and who either did or did not receive systemic therapy were eligible. Sensitivity analyses were carried out., Results: In the no adjuvant therapy cohort (N = 366), 24.9% of patients had an event within 5 years versus 16.8% of patients in the adjuvant therapy cohort (N = 483) (P < 0.01). The ICER was €363 per 1% event prevented. Beyond 18 years after diagnosis, the extrapolated mean cumulative costs per patient in the no adjuvant therapy cohort exceeded those of the adjuvant therapy cohort., Conclusions: In this population of breast cancer patients with isolated tumor cells or micrometastases, €36 300 had to be invested to prevent one event in 5 years of follow-up. Adjuvant systemic therapy was cost saving beyond 18 years after diagnosis.