Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29909564›Full record

ArticleJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2018

Organized screening detects breast cancer at earlier stage regardless of molecular phenotype.

Claire M B Holloway, Li Jiang, Marlo Whitehead, Jennifer M Racz, Patti A Groome

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Claire M B HollowayDepartment of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. claire.holloway@sunnybrook.ca.
Li JiangCritical Care Services Ontario, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Marlo WhiteheadInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Jennifer M RaczDivision of Breast, Endocrine, Metabolic and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Patti A GroomeInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences and Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences · CAMayo Clinic in Arizona · USQueen's University · CAUniversity Health Network · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMortality reduction attributable to organized breast screening is modest. Screening may be less effective at detecting more aggressive cancers at an earlier stage. This study was conducted to determine the relative efficacy of screening mammography to detect cancers at an earlier stage by molecular phenotype.

methodsWe identified 2882 women with primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 and who had a mammogram through the Ontario Breast Screening Program in the 28 months before diagnosis. Five tumor phenotypes were defined by expression of estrogen (ER) and progesterone (PR) receptors and HER2/neu oncogene. We conducted univariable and multivariable analyses to describe the predictors of detection as an interval cancer. Additional analyses identified predictors of detection at stages II, III, or IV compared with stage I, by phenotype. Analyses were adjusted for the effects of age, grade, and breast density.

resultsER negative and HER2 positive tumors were over-represented among interval cancers, and triple negative cancers were more likely than ER +/HER2 - cancers to be detected as interval cancers OR 2.5 (95% CI 2.0-3.2, p < 0.0001). Method of detection (interval vs. screen) and molecular phenotype were independently associated with stage at diagnosis (p < 0.0001), but there was no interaction between method of detection and phenotype (p = 0.44).

conclusionIn a screened population, triple negative and HER2 + breast cancers are diagnosed at a higher stage but this appears to be due to higher growth rates of these tumors rather than a relative inability of screening to detect them.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsCross-Sectional StudiesEarly Detection of CancerErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansMammographyMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingPhenotypeReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneTriple Negative Breast NeoplasmsBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneBiomarkersBreast cancerCancer stagingScreening

Identifiers

PMID29909564
PMCPMC11813263
OpenAlexW2807713114

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.