Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22230363›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2012

Trends in incidence and detection of advanced breast cancer at biennial screening mammography in The Netherlands: a population based study.

Joost Nederend, Lucien Em Duijm, Adri C Voogd, Johanna H Groenewoud, Frits H Jansen, Marieke Wj Louwman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Results of a worldwide survey on the currently used histopathological diagnostic criteria for invasive lobular breast cancer.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2022
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Histopathological characterization of ulcerated breast cancer and comparison to their non-ulcerated counterparts.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2015
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Do not jump too quickly to conclusions.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2012
    Article
  16. Is the tide turning against breast screening?Breast cancer research : BCR · 2012
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Joost NederendDepartment of Radiology, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands. Joost.nederend@cze.nl
Lucien Em Duijm
Adri C Voogd
Johanna H Groenewoud
Frits H Jansen
Marieke Wj Louwman
Catharina Ziekenhuis · NLEindhoven Cancer Registry · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NLRotterdam University of Applied Sciences · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aims of this study were to determine trends in the incidence of advanced breast cancer at screening mammography and the potential of screening to reduce it.

methodsWe included a consecutive series of 351,009 screening mammograms of 85,274 women aged 50-75 years, who underwent biennial screening at a Dutch breast screening region in the period 1997-2008. Two screening radiologists reviewed the screening mammograms of all advanced screen detected and advanced interval cancers and determined whether the advanced cancer (tumor > 20 mm and/or lymph node positive tumor) had been visible at a previous screen. Interval cancers were breast cancers diagnosed in women after a negative screening examination (defined as no recommendation for referral) and before any subsequent screen. Patient and tumor characteristics were compared between women with advanced cancer and women with non-advanced cancer, including ductal carcinoma in situ.

resultsA total of 1,771 screen detected cancers and 669 interval cancers were diagnosed in 2,440 women. Rates of advanced cancer remained stable over the 12-year period; the incidence of advanced screen-detected cancers fluctuated between 1.5 - 1.9 per 1,000 screened women (mean 1.6 per 1,000) and of advanced interval cancers between 0.8 - 1.6 per 1,000 screened women (mean 1.2 per 1,000). Of the 570 advanced screen-detected cancers, 106 (18.6%) were detected at initial screening; 265 (46.5%) cancers detected at subsequent screening had been radiologically occult at the previous screening mammogram, 88 (15.4%) had shown a minimal sign, and 111 (19.5%) had been missed. Corresponding figures for advanced interval cancers were 50.9% (216/424), 24.3% (103/424) and 25.1% (105/424), respectively. At multivariate analysis, women with a ≥ 30 months interval between the latest two screens had an increased risk of screen-detected advanced breast cancer (OR 1.63, 95%CI: 1.07-2.48) and hormone replacement therapy increased the risk of advanced disease among interval cancers (OR 3.04, 95%CI: 1.22-7.53).

conclusionWe observed no decline in the risk of advanced breast cancer during 12 years of biennial screening mammography. The majority of these cancers could not have been prevented through earlier detection at screening.

Indexed as

MammographyMass ScreeningAdultAgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Ductal, BreastCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingCarcinoma, LobularEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansIncidenceMiddle AgedNetherlandsRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID22230363
PMCPMC3496125
OpenAlexW2111232847

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.