ArticleBritish journal of cancer2006
Role of mammography screening as a predictor of survival in postmenopausal breast cancer patients.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Grading of invasive breast carcinoma: the way forward.Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology · 2022Review
- Significant inter- and intra-laboratory variation in grading of invasive breast cancer: A nationwide study of 33,043 patients in the Netherlands.International journal of cancer · 2020Article
- Surgical outcome of patients with core-biopsy-proven nonpalpable breast carcinoma: a large cohort follow-up study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2009Article
- Ultrasound-guided laser-induced thermal therapy for small palpable invasive breast carcinomas: a feasibility study.Annals of surgical oncology · 2009Article
- Tumor characteristics in screen-detected and symptomatic breast cancers.Pathology oncology research : POR · 2008Article
- The influence of socio-economic and surveillance characteristics on breast cancer survival: a French population-based study.British journal of cancer · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We examined the effect of population-based screening programme on tumour characteristics by comparing carcinomas diagnosed during the prescreening (N=341) and screening (N=552) periods. We identified screen detected (N=224), interval (N=99) and clinical cancer (N=229) cases. Median tumour size and proportion of axillary lymph node negative cases were 1.5 cm and 65% in the screen detected group, 2.0 cm and 44% in cases found outside the screening, and 3.2 cm and 41% in the cases from the prescreening period. Survival of the breast cancer patients was 66% (95% CI, 60-71%) in the prescreening era group and 73% (95% CI, 66-78%) in the screening era group after 10 years of follow-up. In the screening era group the survival of the screen detected cases was 86% (95% CI, 80-90%) and that of the clinical cancer cases 73% (95% CI, 66-78%) after 10 years. In multivariate analysis the risk of breast cancer death was not significantly different between the prescreening and screening periods (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.59-1.12, P=0.21). Detection by screening was not an independent prognostic factor in multivariate analysis (HR 0.75; CI 95% 0.50-1.12; P=0.17).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.