Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37878149›Full record

ArticleBreast cancer research and treatment2024

Breast cancer outcomes based on method of detection in community-based breast cancer registry.

Debbie Lee Bennett, Andrea Marie Winter, Laura Billadello, Mary Catherine Lowdermilk, Christina Michelle Doherty, Sakina Kazmi, Sydney Laster, Noor Al-Hammadi, Anna Hardy, Daniel B Kopans and 1 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Breast cancer research and treatment, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
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

11 authors.

Debbie Lee BennettMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. debbie.bennett@wustl.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1898-0361
Andrea Marie WinterRadiax, Seattle, WA, USA.
Laura BilladelloSSM Health, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Mary Catherine LowdermilkSSM Health, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Christina Michelle DohertyMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Sakina KazmiDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Sydney LasterSSM Health, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Noor Al-HammadiDepartment of Health and Clinical Outcomes Research, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Anna HardyDepartment of Health and Clinical Outcomes Research, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.
Daniel B KopansDepartment of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Linda MoyDepartment of Radiology, NYU Langone Health, NYU School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

Saint Louis University Research Institute Saint Louis University Research Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe impact of opportunistic screening mammography in the United States is difficult to quantify, partially due to lack of inclusion regarding method of detection (MOD) in national registries. This study sought to determine the feasibility of MOD collection in a multicenter community registry and to compare outcomes and characteristics of breast cancer based on MOD.

methodsWe conducted a retrospective study of breast cancer patients from a multicenter tumor registry in Missouri from January 2004 - December 2018. Registry data were extracted by certified tumor registrars and included MOD, clinicopathologic information, and treatment. MOD was assigned as screen-detected or clinically detected. Data were analyzed at the patient level. Chi-squared tests were used for categorical variable comparison and Mann-Whitney-U test was used for numerical variable comparison.

results5351 women (median age, 63 years; interquartile range, 53-73 years) were included. Screen-detected cancers were smaller than clinically detected cancers (median size 12 mm vs. 25 mm; P < .001) and more likely node-negative (81% vs. 54%; P < .001), lower grade (P < .001), and lower stage (P < .001). Screen-detected cancers were more likely treated with lumpectomy vs. mastectomy (73% vs. 41%; P < .001) and less likely to require chemotherapy (24% vs. 52%; P < .001). Overall survival for patients with invasive breast cancer was higher for screen-detected cancers (89% vs. 74%, P < .0001).

conclusionMOD can be routinely collected and linked to breast cancer outcomes through tumor registries, with demonstration of significant differences in outcome and characteristics of breast cancers based on MOD. Routine inclusion of MOD in US tumor registries would help quantify the impact of opportunistic screening mammography in the US.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMammographyMass ScreeningMastectomyMiddle AgedRegistriesRetrospective StudiesBreast cancerMammographyMethod of detectionRegistryScreening

Identifiers

PMID37878149

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.