Should breast screening programmes limit their detection of ductal carcinoma in situ?

Clinical Radiology

Volumn 57, Issue 12, 2002, Pages 1086-1089

  Evans, A J ^a   Blanks, R G ^b  

^a NOTTINGHAM CITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Ductal carcinoma in situ; Screening

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST DUCT; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER INVASION; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER SIZE; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0036905321     PISSN: 00099260     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1053/crad.2002.1097     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, Landberg T, Lindholm K Linell F, et al. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. BMJ 1988;297: 943-948.
2. Rosner D, Bedwanu R, Vana J. Noninvasive breast carcinoma: result of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Ann Surg 1980;192:139-147.
3. Beahrs OH, Shapiro S, Smart C, et al. Summary report of the Working Group to review the National Cancer Institute-American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Demonstration Detection Projects. J Nat Cancer Inst 1979;62:641-709.
4. Smart C, Myers M, Gloecker L. Implications from SEER data on breast cancer management. Cancer 1978;41:787-789.
5. Page DL, Dupont WD. Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15-25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer 1995;76:1197-1200.
6. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, et al. Pathological findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) eight-year update of protocol B-17. Cancer 1999;86:429-438.
7. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Craig PH, et al. A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 1996;77:2267-2274.
8. Douglas-Jones AG, Gupta SK, Attanoos RL, et al. A critical appraisal of six modern classifications of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS): correlation with grade of associated invasive carcinoma. Histopathology 1996;29:397-409.
9. Cadman B, Ostrowski J, Quinn C. Invasive ductal carcinoma accompanied by ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): comparison of DCIS grade with grade of invasive component. The Breast 1997;6: 132-137.
10. Lampejo OT, Barnes DM, Smith P, Millis RR. Evaluation of infiltrating ductal carcinoma with a DCIS component: correlation of the histologic type of the in situ component with grade of the infiltrating component. Semin Diag Path 1994;11:215-222.
11. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Wilson ARM. Screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): overdiagnosis or an obligate precursor of invasive disease. J Med Screening 2001;8:149-151.
12. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Wilson ARM, Ellis IO. The detection of DCIS at mammographic screening enables the diagnosis of small, grade 3 invasive tumours. BJC 1997;75:542-544.
13. Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A, Thurfjell E. Nonpalpable breast cancer: mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology 2002;222:165-170.
14. De Nunzio MC, Evans AJ, Pinder SE, et al. Correlations between the mammographic features of screen detected invasive breast cancer and pathological prognostic factors. The Breast 1996;5:1-4.
15. Tabar L, Duffy SW, Vitak B. The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening? Cancer 1999;86: 449-462.
16. Royal College of Radiologists. Quality Assurance Guidelines for Radiologists. January 1997. NHSBSP Publications no 151997.
17. Blanks RG, Moss SM. Monitoring the performance of breast screening programmes: allowing for geographical variation in breast cancer incidence. J Med Screening 1996;3:82-84.
18. Evans A, Pinder S, Wilson R, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: correlation between mammographic and pathologic findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994;162:1307-1311.
19. Ferranti C, Coopmans G, Biganzoli E, Bergonzi S, Mariani L, al e. Relationship between age, mammographic features and pathological tumour characteristics in non-palpable breast cancer. Br J Radiol 2000;73:698-705.
20. Bagnall MJC, Evans AJ, Wilson ARM, et al. Predicting invasion in mammographically-detected microcalcification. Clin Radiol 2001;56:828-832.
21. Spencer NJB, Evans AJ, Galea M, Sibbering DM, Yeoman LJ. Pathological-radiological correlations in benign lesions excised during a breast screening programme. Clin Radiol 1994;49:853-856.
22. Liberman L, LaTrenta LR, Zee KJV. Stereoractic core biopsy of calcifications highly suggestive of malignancy. Radiology 1997;203: 673-677.
23. Whitlock JPL, Evans AJ, Burrell HC, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Blamey RW, et al. Digitally acquired imaging improves upright stereotactic core biopsy of mammographic microcalcifications. Clin Radiol 2000;55:374-377.
24. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans II WP, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy of non-palpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 2001;218:497-502.
25. Baum M. Review of ABC of breast disease. J Med Screening 1995;2:233-234.