Screening interval breast cancers: Mammographic features and prognostic factors

Radiology

Volumn 199, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 811-817

  Burrell, Helen C ^a   Sibbering, D Mark ^a   Wilson, A Robin M ^a   Pinder, Sarah E ^a   Evans, Andrew J ^a   Yeoman, Lindsey J ^a   Elston, Christopher W ^a   Ellis, Ian O ^a   Blamey, Roger W ^a   Robertson, John F R ^a  

^a NOTTINGHAM CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms, diagnosis; Cancer screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER GRADING; CANCER SCREENING; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEASUREMENT; OCCULT CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 0004519757     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiology.199.3.8638010     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Nystrom L, Rutqvist LE, Wall S, et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 1993; 341:973-978.
2. Holmberg LH, Tabar L, Adami HO, Bergstrom R. Survival in breast cancer diagnosed between mammographic screening examinations. Lancet 1986; 2:27-30.
3. National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. A radiographic quality control manual for mammography. Sheffield, England: National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, 1993.
4. Patnick J, Muir Gray JA. Guidelines on the collection and use of breast cancer data. Sheffield, England: National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, 1993.
5. Wolfe JN. Breast parenchymal patterns and their changes with age. Radiology 1976; 121:545-552.
6. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow up. Histopathology 1991; 19:403-410.
7. Ellis IO, Galea M, Broughton N, Locker A, Blarney RW, Elston CW. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. II. Histological type: relationship with survival in a large study with long-term follow up. Histopathology 1992; 20:479-489.
8. Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Galea M, O'Rourke S, Blarney RW, Elston CW. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long-term follow up. Histopathology 1994; 24: 41-47.
9. Sibbering DM, O'Rourke JS, Galea MH, et al. A comparison of the characteristics and prognosis of screen detected and symptomatic breast cancers (abstr). Breast 1993; 2:190.
10. Haybittle JL, Blarney RW, Elston CW, et al. A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1982; 45:361-366.
11. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimal interval between mammographic screening examinations? an analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer 1987; 55:547-551.
12. Woodman CBJ, Threlfall AG, Boggis CRM, Prior P. Is the three year breast screening interval too long? occurence of interval cancers in NHS breast screening programme's north western region. BMJ1995; 310:224-226.
13. Peeters PHM, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R, Mravunac M, Vooijs GP. The occurrence of interval cancers in the Nijmegen screening programme. Br J Cancer 1989; 59:929-932.
14. Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellstrom L, Somers A. Analysis of interval breast carcinomas in a randomised screening trial in Stockholm. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1987; 9:219-225.
15. Andersson I, Hildell J, Muhlow A, Pettersson H. Number of projections in mammography: influence on detection of breast disease, AJR 1978; 130:349-351.
16. Bassett LW, Bunnell DH, Jahanshahi R, Gold RH, Arndt RD, Linsman J. Breast cancer detection: one versus two views. Radiology 1987; 165:95-97.
17. van Dijck JAAM, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R. One-view versus two-view mammography in baseline screening for breast cancer: a review. Br J Radiol 1992; 65:971-976.
18. Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AAS. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 1994; 191:241-244.
19. Anderson EDC, Muir BB, Walsh JS, Kirkpatrick AE. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 1994; 49:248-251.
20. Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology 1992; 184:613-617.
21. van Dijck J, Verbeek ALM, Hendriks JHCL, Holland R. The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program. Cancer 1993; 72:1933-1938.
22. Ikeda D, Andersson I, Wattsgard C, Janzon L, Linell F. Interval carcinomas in the Malmo mammographic screening trial: radiographic appearance and prognostic considerations. AJR 1992; 159:287-294.
23. Burhenne HJ, Burhenne LW, Goldberg F, et al. Interval breast cancers in the screening mammography program of British Columbia. AJR 1994; 162:1067-1071.
24. Holland R, Mravunac M, Hendriks JHCL, Bekker BV. So-called interval cancers of the breast. Cancer 3982; 49:2527-2533.
25. Holland R, Hendriks JHCL, Mravunac M. Mammographically occult breast cancer: a pathologic and radiologic study. Cancer 1983; 52:1810-1819.
26. Hilleren DJ, Andersson IT, Lindholm K, Linnell FS. Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographi cfindings in a 10-year experience. Radiology 1991; 178:149-154.
27. DeGroote R, Rush BF, Milazzo J, Warden MJ, Rocko JM. Interval breast cancer: a more aggressive subset of breast neoplasias. Surgery 1983; 94:543-547.
28. Duncan AA, Hosie KB, Nottingham J, Bishop HM, Wallis MG. Interval cancers: are they more aggressive? (abstr). Clin Radiol 1993; 48:350.
29. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L, Roeser R. Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1982; 69:349-355.