The contribution of clinical breast examination to the accuracy of breast screening

Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Volumn 101, Issue 18, 2009, Pages 1236-1243

  Chiarelli, Anna M ^a,b   Majpruz, Vicky ^a   Brown, Patrick ^a,b   Thériault, Marc ^a,b   Shumak, Rene ^a   Mai, Verna ^a  

^a CANCER CARE ONTARIO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER CENTER; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; NURSE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; BREAST; BREAST TUMOR; CANADA; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; LABORATORY DIAGNOSIS; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MULTICENTER STUDY; PALPATION; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; RISK FACTOR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICS;

AGED; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CANCER CARE FACILITIES; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; ONTARIO; PALPATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 70349249770     PISSN: 00278874     EISSN: 14602105     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djp241     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Lipskie TL. A summary of cancer screening guidelines. Chronic Dis Can. 1998 ; 19 ( 3 ): 112-130.
2. IARC Working Group. Efficacy of screening. In: Vainio H, Bianchini F, eds. Handbooks of Cancer Prevention: Breast Cancer Screening. Lyon, France: IARC Press ; 2002 : 87-117.
3. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002 ; 137 ( 5, pt 1 ): 347-360. (Pubitemid 34977137)
4. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, 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 ( 8433 ): 829-832.
5. 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 ( 2 ): 349-355
6. Schroen AA, Wobbes T, van der Sluis RF. Interval carcinomas of the breast: a group with intermediate outcome. J Surg Oncol. 1996 ; 63 ( 3 ): 141-144.
7. Brekelmans CT, van Gorp JM, Peeters PH, Collette HJ. Histopathology and growth rate of interval breast carcinoma. Characterization of different subgroups. Cancer. 1996 ; 78 ( 6 ): 1220-1228.
8. Rimer BK, Bluman LG. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997 ; 22 : 131-138.
9. Brett J, Austoker J, Ong G. Do women who undergo further investigation for breast screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? A multicentre follow-up study comparing different breast screening result groups five months after their last breast screening appointment. J Public Health Med. 1998 ; 20 ( 4 ): 396-403.
10. Brett J, Austoker J. Women who are recalled for further investigation for breast screening: psychological consequences 3 years after recall and factors affecting re-attendance. J Public Health Med. 2001 ; 23 ( 4 ): 292-300.
11. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. The rational clinical examination. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA. 1999 ; 282 ( 13 ): 1270-1280.
12. 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 ( 1 ): 16-21.
13. Baines CJ, Miller AB, Bassett AA. Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Cancer. 1989 ; 63 ( 9 ): 1816-1822.
14. Baines CJ. Physical examination of the breasts in screening for breast cancer. J Gerontol. 1992 ; 47 ( Spec No ): 63-67.
15. Chiarelli AM, Halapy E, Nadalin V, Shumak R, O'Malley F, Mai V. Performance measures from 10 years of breast screening in the Ontario Breast Screening Program, 1990/91 to 2000. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2006 ; 15 ( 1 ): 34-42.
16. Libstug AR, Moravan V, Aitken SE. Results from the Ontario breast screening program, 1990 - 1995. J Med Screen. 1998 ; 5 ( 2 ): 73-80.
17. Chiarelli AM, Kirsh VA, Klar NS, et al. Infl uence of patterns of hormone replacement therapy use and mammographic density on breast cancer detection. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 ; 15 ( 10 ): 1856-1862.
18. Holowaty EJ, Marrett LD, Fehringer G. Methods. In: Cancer Incidence in Ontario: Trends and Regional Variations in the 1980s. Toronto, ON, Canada : Publications Ontario ; 1995 : 6.
19. UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group. First results on mortality reduction in the UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer. Lancet. 1988 ; 2 ( 8608 ): 411-416.
20. UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group. Sensitivity and specificity of screening in the UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer. In: Miller AB, Chamberlain J, Day NE, Hakama M, Prorok PC, eds. Cancer Screening. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press ; 1991 : 3-17.
21. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, Rimer BK, Shapiro S. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993 ; 85 ( 20 ): 1644-1656.
22. Miller AB, Baines CJ, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years. Can Med Assoc J. 1992 ; 147 ( 10 ): 1477-1488.
23. Ohuchi N, Yoshida K, Kimura M, et al. Comparison of false negative rates among breast cancer screening modalities with or without mammography: Miyagi trial. Jpn J Cancer Res. 1995 ; 86 ( 5 ): 501-506.
24. Baker LH. Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report. CA Cancer J Clin. 1982 ; 32 ( 4 ): 194-225.
25. Chamberlain J, Clifford RE, Nathan BE, Price JL, Burn I. Error-rates in screening for breast cancer by clinical examination and mammography. Clin Oncol. 1979 ; 5 ( 2 ): 135-146.
26. Bobo JK, Lee NC, Thames SF. Findings from 752,081 clinical breast examinations reported to a national screening program from 1995 through 1998. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 ; 92 ( 12 ): 971-976.
27. Fenton JJ, Barton MB, Geiger AM, et al. Screening clinical breast examination: how often does it miss lethal breast cancer? J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2005 ; 35 : 67-71.
28. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that infl uence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002 ; 225 ( 1 ): 165-175
29. Oestreicher N, Lehman CD, Seger DJ, Buist DS, White E. The incremental contribution of clinical breast examination to invasive cancer detection in a mammography screening program. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005 ; 184 ( 2 ): 428-432.
30. Fenton JJ, Rolnick SJ, Harris EL, et al. Specificity of clinical breast examination in community practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2007 ; 22 ( 3 ): 332-337.
31. Knight JA, Libstug AR, Moravan V, Boyd NF. An assessment of the infl uence of clinical breast examination reports on the interpretation of mammograms in a breast screening program. Ontario Breast Screening Program Radiologists Research Group. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1998 ; 48 ( 1 ): 65-71.
32. Coldman AJ, Major D, Doyle GP, et al. Organized breast screening programs in Canada: effect of radiologist reading volumes on outcomes. Radiology. 2006 ; 238 ( 3 ): 809-815.
33. Chiarelli AM, Mai V, Halapy EE, Shumak RS, O'Malley FP, Klar NS. Effect of screening result on waiting times to assessment and breast cancer diagnosis: results from the Ontario Breast Screening Program. Can J Public Health. 2005 ; 96 ( 4 ): 259-263.