Use of previous screening mammograms to identify features indicating cases that would have a possible gain in prognosis following earlier detection

被引:45
作者
Broeders, MJM
Onland-Moret, NC
Rijken, HJTM
Hendriks, JHCL
Verbeek, ALM
Holland, R
机构
[1] Univ Nijmegen, Ctr Med, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, NL-6525 EZ Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Utrecht, Ctr Med, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, Utrecht, Netherlands
[3] Univ Nijmegen, Ctr Med, Natl Expert & Training Ctr Breast Canc Screening, Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
breast cancer; mammography; screening; interval cancer;
D O I
10.1016/S0959-8049(03)00311-3
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
False-negative screening mammograms generally refer to breast cancers that were overlooked or misinterpreted at screening. An important question is whether earlier detection could have made a difference in the prognosis of the women concerned. We reviewed screening and diagnostic mammograms of 234 screen-detected and interval cancer cases (aged 44-84 years) diagnosed between 1991 and 1996 in the Nijmegen breast cancer screening programme. A lesion was visible on 117 (50%) of the screening mammograms prior to the diagnosis of breast cancer. Fifty-one out of the 117 cancers had poor prognostic characteristics at diagnosis (i.e. N+ and/or T2+) and could potentially have benefited from an earlier diagnosis ('possible gain'). The 'possible gain' cases were more often characterised by architectural distortion (29 vs. 10%; P = 0.01) or a high-density mass (25 vs. 13%; P=0.06) on the mammogram prior to diagnosis than the 58 'no gain' cases. Our study shows that architectural distortion and non-spiculated high-density masses on the mammogram prior to diagnosis are associated with a possible gain in prognosis. Earlier detection of the carcinomas preceded by these signs may well have an impact on breast cancer mortality and thus warrant extra attention in radiological practice. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:1770 / 1775
页数:6
相关论文
共 31 条
[11]   CLASSIFYING INTERVAL CANCERS [J].
DUNCAN, AA ;
WALLIS, MG .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1995, 50 (11) :774-777
[12]   Incident round cancers: What lessons can we learn? [J].
Duncan, KA ;
Needham, G ;
Gilbert, FJ ;
Deans, HE .
CLINICAL RADIOLOGY, 1998, 53 (01) :29-32
[13]   PREVIOUS MAMMOGRAMS IN PATIENTS WITH IMPALPABLE BREAST-CARCINOMA - RETROSPECTIVE VS BLINDED INTERPRETATION [J].
HARVEY, JA ;
FAJARDO, LL ;
INNIS, CA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1993, 161 (06) :1167-1172
[14]  
HOLLAND R, 1983, CANCER, V52, P1810, DOI 10.1002/1097-0142(19831115)52:10<1810::AID-CNCR2820521009>3.0.CO
[15]  
2-F
[16]   The false-negative mammogram [J].
Huynh, PT ;
Jarolimek, AM ;
Daye, S .
RADIOGRAPHICS, 1998, 18 (05) :1137-1154
[17]   INTERVAL CARCINOMAS IN THE MALMO MAMMOGRAPHIC SCREENING TRIAL - RADIOGRAPHIC APPEARANCE AND PROGNOSTIC CONSIDERATIONS [J].
IKEDA, DM ;
ANDERSSON, I ;
WATTSGARD, C ;
JANZON, L ;
LINELL, F .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 1992, 159 (02) :287-294
[18]   Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen [J].
Jones, RD ;
McLean, L ;
Young, JR ;
Simpson, W ;
Neilson, F .
BREAST, 1996, 5 (05) :339-343
[19]   Do non-specific minimal signs in a biennial mammographic breast cancer screening programme need further diagnostic assessment? [J].
Maes, RM ;
Dronkers, DJ ;
Hendriks, JHCL ;
Thijssen, MAO ;
Nab, HW .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 1997, 70 :34-38
[20]   Radiological peer review of interval cancers in the East Anglian breast screening programme: what are we missing? [J].
McCann, J ;
Britton, PD ;
Warren, RML ;
Hunnam, G .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCREENING, 2001, 8 (02) :77-85