ArticleBMC cancer2021
Screening is associated with lower mastectomy rates in eastern Switzerland beyond stage effects.
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- AI performance varies considerably across mammography devices: a multi-site and multi-vendor retrospective study.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Retrospective evaluation of interval breast cancer screening mammograms by radiologists and AI.European radiology · 2026Article
- Trends in postmastectomy radiotherapy for early and locally advanced breast cancer in Switzerland: a population-based cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2026Article
- Risk factors for interval breast cancer: insights from a decade of a mammography screening program.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Article
- [The possible benefit of artificial intelligence in an organized population-related screening program : Initial results and perspective].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Article
- Breast cancer patients enrolled in the Swiss mammography screening program "donna" demonstrate prolonged survival.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2024Article
- Marrying Story with Science: The Impact of Outdated and Inconsistent Breast Cancer Screening Practices in Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA recent study found an influence of organized mammography screening programmes (MSPs) on geographical and temporal variation of mastectomy rates. We aimed to quantify the effect on the example of one of the cantonal programmes in Switzerland.
methodsWe used incidence data for the years 2010-2017 from the cancer registry of Eastern Switzerland. We included women with invasive-non-metastatic breast cancer (BC) in the screening age group 50-69-year-olds in the canton of St.Gallen. We compared mastectomy rates among cancer patients detected through the organised screening programme (MSP) vs. otherwise detected by stage.
resultsMSP-detected patients in St.Gallen presented with lower stages. 95% of MSP-detected had stages I-II vs 76% of Non-MSP-detected. Within all non-metastatic stage, tumour size and nodal status groups, MSP-detected patients had lower mastectomy rates, overall 10% vs 24% in 50-69-year-old non-participants. Their odds of receiving a mastectomy are about half of the Non-MSP-detected (OR = 0.48, p = 0.002).
conclusionsOur study showed that MSPs have a positive effect on lowering mastectomy rates. Screening participants are significantly less likely to receive a mastectomy compared to non-participants, which must be attributed to additional factors than just lower stages. Lower mastectomy rates lead to a higher quality of life for many patients.
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.