Breast cancer biology varies by method of detection and may contribute to overdiagnosis

Surgery (United States)

Volumn 160, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 454-462

  Hayse, Brandon ^a   Hooley, Regina J ^a   Killelea, Brigid K ^a   Horowitz, Nina R ^a   Chagpar, Anees B ^a   Lannin, Donald R ^a  

^a YALE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGE; AGED; BREAST CANCER; BREAST SELF EXAMINATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER GRADING; CANCER STAGING; CONFERENCE PAPER; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LUMINAL A BREAST CANCER; LUMINAL B BREAST CANCER; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL ONCOLOGIST; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RACE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SELF EVALUATION; SELF REPORT; TRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER; TUMOR VOLUME; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICE; MASS SCREENING; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA; DIAGNOSTIC SELF EVALUATION; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL OVERUSE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 84969972418     PISSN: 00396060     EISSN: 15327361     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.03.031     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. 1 Nelson, H.D., Tyne, K., Naik, A., Bougatsos, C., Chan, B.K., Humphrey, L., et al. Screening for breast cancer: An update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 151 (2009), 727–737 W237–42.
2. 2 Pace, L.E., Keating, N.L., A systematic assessment of benefits and risks to guide breast cancer screening decisions. JAMA 311 (2014), 1327–1335.
3. 3 Sparano, J.A., Gray, R.J., Makower, D.F., Pritchard, K.I., Albain, K.S., Hayes, D.F., et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 373 (2015), 2005–2014.
4. 4 Gonzalez-Angulo, A.M., Litton, J.K., Broglio, K.R., Meric-Bernstam, F., Rakkhit, R., Cardoso, F., et al. High risk of recurrence for patients with breast cancer who have human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, node-negative tumors 1 cm or smaller. J Clin Oncol 27 (2009), 5700–5706.
5. 5 Hudis, C.A., Biology before anatomy in early breast cancer—Precisely the point. N Engl J Med 373 (2015), 2079–2080.
6. 6 Paik, S., Shak, S., Tang, G., Kim, C., Baker, J., Cronin, M., et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 351 (2004), 2817–2826.
7. 7 Bleyer, A., Welch, H.G., Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med 367 (2012), 1998–2005.
8. 8 Esserman, L., Shieh, Y., Thompson, I., Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. JAMA 302 (2009), 1685–1692.
9. 9 Esserman, L.J., Thompson, I.M., Reid, B., Nelson, P., Ransohoff, D.F., Welch, H.G., et al. Addressing overdiagnosis and overtreatment in cancer: A prescription for change. Lancet Oncol 15 (2014), e234–e242.
10. 10 Jorgensen, K.J., Gotzsche, P.C., Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: Systematic review of incidence trends. BMJ, 339, 2009, b2587.
11. 11 Kalager, M., Adami, H.O., Bretthauer, M., Tamimi, R.M., Overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer due to mammography screening: Results from the Norwegian screening program. Ann Intern Med 156 (2012), 491–499.
12. 12 Miller, A.B., Wall, C., Baines, C.J., Sun, P., To, T., Narod, S.A., Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: Randomised screening trial. BMJ, 348, 2014, g366.
13. 13 Etzioni, R., Xia, J., Hubbard, R., Weiss, N.S., Gulati, R., A reality check for overdiagnosis estimates associated with breast cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014, 106.
14. 14 Moss, S.M., Wale, C., Smith, R., Evans, A., Cuckle, H., Duffy, S.W., Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality in the UK age trial at 17 years' follow-up: A randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 16 (2015), 1123–1132.
15. 15 Puliti, D., Duffy, S.W., Miccinesi, G., de Koning, H., Lynge, E., Zappa, M., et al. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: A literature review. J Med Screen 19:Suppl 1 (2012), 42–56.
16. 16 Hooley, R.J., Greenberg, K.L., Stackhouse, R.M., Geisel, J.L., Butler, R.S., Philpotts, L.E., Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: Initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 265 (2012), 59–69.
17. 17 Weigert, J., Steenbergen, S., The Connecticut experiment: The role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J 18 (2012), 517–522.
18. 18 Berg, W.A., Zhang, Z., Lehrer, D., Jong, R.A., Pisano, E.D., Barr, R.G., et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA 307 (2012), 1394–1404.
19. 19 Carkaci, S., Santiago, L., Adrada, B.E., Whitman, G.J., Screening for breast cancer with sonography. Seminars in Roentgenology 46 (2011), 285–291.
20. 20 Molino, A., Pavarana, M., Micciolo, R., Nortilli, R., Pedersini, R., Manno, P., et al. Comparative study of clinical, pathological and biological characteristics of symptomatic versus asymptomatic breast cancers. Annals of Oncol 11 (2000), 581–586.
21. 21 Kirsh, V.A., Chiarelli, A.M., Edwards, S.A., O'Malley, F.P., Shumak, R.S., Yaffe, M.J., et al. Tumor characteristics associated with mammographic detection of breast cancer in the Ontario breast screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst 103 (2011), 942–950.
22. 22 Redondo, M., Funez, R., Medina-Cano, F., Rodrigo, I., Acebal, M., Tellez, T., et al. Detection methods predict differences in biology and survival in breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer, 12, 2012, 604.
23. 23 Crispo, A., Barba, M., D'Aiuto, G., De Laurentiis, M., Grimaldi, M., Rinaldo, M., et al. Molecular profiles of screen detected vs. symptomatic breast cancer and their impact on survival: Results from a clinical series. BMC Cancer, 13, 2013, 15.
24. 24 Caldarella, A., Puliti, D., Crocetti, E., Bianchi, S., Vezzosi, V., Apicella, P., et al. Biological characteristics of interval cancers: A role for biomarkers in the breast cancer screening. Cancer Res Clin Oncol 139 (2013), 181–185.
25. 25 Esserman, L.J., Shieh, Y., Rutgers, E.J., Knauer, M., Retel, V.P., Mook, S., et al. Impact of mammographic screening on the detection of good and poor prognosis breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130 (2011), 725–734.
26. 26 Drukker, C.A., Schmidt, M.K., Rutgers, E.J., Cardoso, F., Kerlikowske, K., Esserman, L.J., et al. Mammographic screening detects low-risk tumor biology breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 144 (2014), 103–111.
27. 27 Sanders, M.E., Schuyler, P.A., Dupont, W.D., Page, D.L., The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up. Cancer 103 (2005), 2481–2484.
28. 28 Smith, R.A., Counterpoint: Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening. JACR 11 (2014), 648–652.
29. 29 Podo, F., Santoro, F., Di Leo, G., Manoukian, S., de Giacomi, C., Corcione, S., et al. Triple-negative versus non-triple-negative breast cancers in high-risk women: Phenotype features and survival from the HIBCRIT-1 MRI-including screening study. Clin Cancer Res 22 (2016), 895–904.
30. 30 Sprague, B.L., Stout, N.K., Schechter, C., van Ravesteyn, N.T., Cevik, M., Alagoz, O., et al. Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Annals Internal Med 162 (2015), 157–166.
31. 31 Hayse, B., Lannin, D.R., Supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts. Annals Internal Med 162 (2015), 801–802.