Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25149183›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2014

International variation in management of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Antonio Ponti, Elsebeth Lynge, Ted James, Ondřej Májek, My von Euler-Chelpin, Ahti Anttila, Patricia Fitzpatrick, Maria Piera Mano, Masaaki Kawai, Astrid Scharpantgen and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Mortality of women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a population-based study from the Girona province, Spain (1994-2013).Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019
    Observational
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. The diagnostic challenge of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

20 authors.

Antonio PontiCPO Piemonte, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy. Electronic address: antonio.ponti@cpo.it.
Elsebeth LyngeDepartment of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ted JamesDepartment of Surgery, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, USA.
Ondřej MájekInstitute of Biostatistics and Analyses, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic.
My von Euler-ChelpinDepartment of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Ahti AnttilaMass Screening Registry, Finnish Cancer Registry, Helsinki, Finland.
Patricia FitzpatrickNational Cancer Screening Service, Dublin, Ireland.
Maria Piera ManoCPO Piemonte, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy.
Masaaki KawaiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Miyagi, Japan.
Astrid ScharpantgenProgramme Mammographie, Direction de la Santé, Luxembourg.
Jacques FracheboudErasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Solveig HofvindThe Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.
Carmen VidalCancer Detection and Control Programme, Catalan Institute of Oncology, Barcelona, Spain.
Nieves AscunceBreast Cancer Screening Programme, Instituto de Salud Pública, Navarra, Spain.
Dolores SalasGeneral Directorate Research and Public Health and Centre for Public Health Research, Valencia, Spain.
Jean-Luc BulliardLausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nereo SegnanCPO Piemonte, AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy.
Karla KerlikowskeDepartment of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Stephen TaplinBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA.
ICSN DCIS Working group

Funding

Statistical Coordinating Center for the Breast Cancer Surveillance ConsortiumU01CA086076 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON · PI MIGLIORETTI, DIANA L · 2000 to 2011
$8.5M
IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF MAMMOGRAPHIC INTERPRETATIONU01CA063731 · NCI · KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON · PI BUIST, DIANA SM · 1994 to 2011
$6.7M
VERMONT BREAST CANCER SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMU01CA070013 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT &ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI GELLER, BERTA M · 1995 to 2011
$6.7M
UTILITY AND OUTCOMES FROM MAMMOGRAPHY IN NORTH CAROLINAU01CA070040 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI YANKASKAS, BONNIE C · 1995 to 2011
$6.4M
San Francisco Mammography Registry-A Research SourceU01CA063740 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI KERLIKOWSKE, KARLA M · 1994 to 2011
$6.2M
STRATEGIC STUDIES IN BREAST CANCER SURVEILLANCEU01CA086082 · NCI · DARTMOUTH COLLEGE · PI ONEGA, TRACY · 2000 to 2011
$4.9M
REFERRAL PATTERNS AND COST ANALYSIS OF SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY--FOLLOW-UP/BIOPSYU01CA063736 · NCI · COOPER INSTITUTE · PI CUTTER, GARY · 1994 to 2004
$2.7M
NEW MEXICO MAMMOGRAPHY PROJECTU01CA069976 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO · PI ROSENBERG, ROBERT D · 1995 to 2005
$2.7M
NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063731NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063736NCI NIH HHS U01 CA063740NCI NIH HHS U01 CA069976NCI NIH HHS U01 CA070013NCI NIH HHS U01 CA070040NCI NIH HHS U01 CA086076NCI NIH HHS U01 CA086082NCI NIH HHS U01CA63731NCI NIH HHS U01CA63736NCI NIH HHS U01CA63740NCI NIH HHS U01CA69976NCI NIH HHS U01CA70013NCI NIH HHS U01CA70040NCI NIH HHS U01CA86076NCI NIH HHS U01CA86082
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuctal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) incidence has grown with the implementation of screening and its detection varies across International Cancer Screening Network (ICSN) countries. The aim of this survey is to describe the management of screen-detected DCIS in ICSN countries and to evaluate the potential for treatment related morbidity.

methodsWe sought screen-detected DCIS data from the ICSN countries identified during 2004-2008. We adopted standardised data collection forms and analysis and explored DCIS diagnosis and treatment processes ranging from pre-operative diagnosis to type of surgery and radiotherapy.

resultsTwelve countries contributed data from a total of 15 screening programmes, all from Europe except the United States of America and Japan. Among women aged 50-69 years, 7,176,050 screening tests and 5324 screen-detected DCIS were reported. From 21% to 93% of DCIS had a pre-operative diagnosis (PO); 67-90% of DCIS received breast conservation surgery (BCS), and in 41-100% of the cases this was followed by radiotherapy; 6.4-59% received sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) only and 0.8-49% axillary dissection (ALND) with 0.6% (range by programmes 0-8.1%) being node positive. Among BCS patients 35% received SLNB only and 4.8% received ALND. Starting in 2006, PO and SLNB use increased while ALND remained stable. SLNB and ALND were associated with larger size and higher grade DCIS lesions.

conclusionsVariation in DCIS management among screened women is wide and includes lymph node surgery beyond what is currently recommended. This indicates the presence of varying levels of overtreatment and the potential for its reduction.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingEarly Detection of CancerEuropeFemaleHumansInternational AgenciesJapanLymph Node ExcisionMastectomy, SegmentalMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareRadiotherapyUnited StatesAxillary stagingBreast cancerCancer registrationDuctal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)OvertreatmentScreening mammography

Identifiers

PMID25149183
PMCPMC4275301

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.