Reason for late-stage breast cancer: Absence of screening or detection, or breakdown in follow-up?

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 96, Issue 20, 2004, Pages 1518-1527

  Taplin, Stephen H ^a,f   Ichikawa, Laura ^a   Yood, Marrianne Ulcickas ^b   Manos, M Michele ^c   Geiger, Ann M ^c   Weinmann, Sheila ^c   Gilbert, Joyce ^c   Mouchawar, Judy ^c   Leyden, Wendy A ^c   Altaras, Robin ^a   Beverly, Robert K ^a   Casso, Deborah ^a   Oakes Westbrook, Emily ^a   Bischoff, Kimberly ^c   Zapka, Jane G ^d   Barlow, William E ^e  

^a CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^b HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^c KAISER PERMANENTE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^e Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^f NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AUTOMATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; EARLY CANCER; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; EDUCATION; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HUMAN; LOWEST INCOME GROUP; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MARRIAGE; MEDICAL RECORD; METASTASIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TUMOR VOLUME; AGE; ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; CLINICAL TRIAL; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RISK; RISK FACTOR; STATISTICS; UNITED STATES;

AGE FACTORS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MARITAL STATUS; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL RECORDS; NEOPLASM STAGING; ODDS RATIO; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK FACTORS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 6944250368     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djh284     Document Type: Review

References (44)

1. Howard J. Using mammography for cancer control: an unrealized potential. CA Cancer J Clin 1987;37:33-48.
2. Engstrom PF. Cancer control objectives for the year 2000. Prog Clin Biol Res 1986;216:1-10.
3. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 2002;359:909-19.
4. Shapiro S. Evidence on screening for breast cancer from a randomized trial. Cancer 1977;39:2772-82.
5. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrock C, Ernster VL. Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1995;273:149-54.
6. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:347-60.
7. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJG, Gad A, Baldetorp L, Holmberg LH, Grontoft O, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;1:829-32.
8. Greenwald P, Sondik EJ, editors. NCI Monographs: Cancer control objectives for the nation: 1985-2000. 2nd ed. NIH Publication No. 86-2880. Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Health; 1986.
9. Blackman DK, Bennett EM, Miller DS. Trends in self-reported use of mammograms (1989-1997) and Papanicolaou tests (1991-1997) - Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. MMWR CDC Surveill Summ 1999;48:1-22.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recent trends in mortality rates for four major cancers, by sex and race/ethnicity-United States, 1990-1998. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2002;51:49-53.
11. Zapka JG, Taplin SH, Solberg LI, Manos MM. A framework for improving the quality of cancer care: the case of breast and cervical cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:4-13.
12. Valanis BG, Glasgow RE, Mullooly J, Vogt TM, Whitlock EP, Boles SM, et al. Screening HMO women overdue for both mammograms and pap tests. Prev Med 2002;34:40-50.
13. Taplin SH, Rutter CM, Finder C, Mandelson MT, Houn F, White E. Screening mammography: clinical image quality and the risk of interval breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:797-803.
14. Mandelblatt JS, Yabroff KR. Effectiveness of interventions designed to increase mammography use: a meta-analysis of provider-targeted strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:759-67.
15. Yabroff KR, Mandelblatt JS. Interventions targeted toward patients to increase mammography use. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8: 749-57.
16. Johannesson G, Geirsson G, Day N. The effect of mass screening in Iceland, 1965-74, on the incidence and mortality of cervical carcinoma. Int J Cancer 1978;21:418-25.
17. 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: 349-55.
18. Prorok PC. Epidemiologic approach for cancer screening. Problems in design and analysis of trials. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 1992;14:117-28.
19. Day NE, Williams DR, Khaw KT. Breast cancer screening programmes: the development of a monitoring and evaluation system. Br J Cancer 1989;59:954-8.
20. National Committee for Quality Assurance. The State of Managed Care Quality, 2001. Available at: http://www.ncqa.org/somc2001. [Last accessed: September 3, 2004.]
21. Fleming ID, Cooper JS, et al., editors. American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual. 5th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven; 1997. p. 174.
22. Young Jr JL, Roffers SD, Ries LA, Fritz AG, Hurlbut AA, editors. SEER summary staging manual - 2000, coding and instructions. National Cancer Institute, Bethesda (MD). Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/tools/ssm/intro.pdf. [Last accessed: August 23, 2004.]
23. Taplin SH, Mandelson MT, Anderman C, White E, Thompson RS, Timlin D, et al. Mammography diffusion and trends in late-stage breast cancer: evaluating outcomes in a population. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997;6:625-31.
24. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (BI-RADS). 3rd ed. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 1998.
25. Wu Y, Weissfeld JL, Weinberg GB, Lewis HK. Screening mammography and late-stage breast cancer: a population-based study. Prev Med 1999;28: 572-8.
26. Buseman S, Mouchawar J, Calonge N, Byers T. Mammography screening matters for young women with breast carcinoma: evidence of downstaging among 42-49-year-old women with a history of previous mammography screening. Cancer 2003;97:352-8.
27. McCarthy EP, Burns RB, Freund KM, Harris F, Blank J, Ensrud K, et al. Mammography use, breast cancer stage at diagnosis, and survival among older women. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:1226-33.
28. Gabriel H, Wilson TE, Helvie MA. Breast cancer in women 65-74 years old: earlier detection by mammographic screening. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1997;168:23-7.
29. Arndt V, Sturmer T, Stegmaier C, Ziegler H, Dhom G, Brenner H. Socio-demographic factors, health behavior and late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer in Germany: a population-based study. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:719-27.
30. Kosters JP, Gotzsche PC. Regular self-examination or clinical examination for early detection of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(2): CD003373.
31. Bancej C, Decker K, Chiarelli A, Harrison M, Turner D, Brisson J. Contribution of clinical breast examination to mammography screening in the early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen 2003;10:16-21.
32. Ciatto S, Brancato B, Rosselli Del Turco M, Risso G, Catarzi S, Morrone D, et al. Comparison of standard reading and computer aided diagnosis (CAD) on a proficiency test of screening mammography. Radiol Med (Torino) 2003;106:59-65.
33. Galen B, Staab E, Sullivan DC, Pisano ED. Congressional update: report from the biomedical imaging program of the National Cancer Institute. American College of Radiology Imaging Network: the digital mammographic imaging screening trial - an update. Acad Radiol 2002;9:374-5.
34. Skaane P, Young K, Skjennald A. Population-based mammography screening: comparison of screen-film and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading - Oslo I study. Radiology 2003;229:877-84.
35. Bobo JK, Lawson HW, Lee NC. Risk factors for failure to detect a cancer during clinical breast examinations (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2003;14:461-8.
36. Rao PN, Levine E, Myers MO, Prakash V, Watson J, Stolier A, et al. Elevation of serum riboflavin carrier protein in breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1999;8:985-90.
37. Djuric Z, Heilbrun LK, Lababidi S, Berzinkas E, Simon MS, Kosir MA. Levels of 5-hydroxymethyl-2′-deoxyuridine in DNA from blood of women scheduled for breast biopsy. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10: 147-9.
38. McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Rebner M, Johnson CC. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Am J Prev Med 1996;12:282-8.
39. Yabroff KR, Washington KS, Leader A, Neilson E, Mandelblatt J. Is the promise of cancer-screening programs being compromised? Quality of follow-up care after abnormal screening results. Med Care Res Rev 2003; 60:294-331.
40. Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Boyce A, Jepson C, Engstrom PF. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med 1991;114:657-61.
41. Zapka JG, Puleo E, Taplin SH, Goins KV, Ulcickas Yood M, Mouchawar J, et al. Processes of care in cervical and breast cancer screening and follow-up - the importance of communication. Prev Med 2004;39:81-90.
42. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L. Periodic screening for breast cancer: the health insurance plan project and its sequelae, 1963-1986. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press; 1988:55.
43. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Yen MF, Chiang CF, et al. The Swedish Two-County Trial twenty years later. Updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am 2000; 38:625-51.
44. Goins KV, Zapka JG, Geiger AM, Goins KV, Yood MU, Mouchawar J, et al. Implementation of systems strategies for breast and cervical cancer screening services in health maintenance organizations. Am J Manag Care 2003; 9:745-57.