Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Cancer ; 153(2): 312-319, 2023 07 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37038266

RESUMO

Women tend to make a decision about participation in breast cancer screening and adhere to this for future invitations. Therefore, our study aimed to provide high-quality information on cumulative risks of false-positive (FP) recall and screen-detected breast cancer over multiple screening examinations. Individual Dutch screening registry data (2005-2018) were gathered on subsequent screening examinations of 92 902 women age 49 to 51 years in 2005. Survival analyses were used to calculate cumulative risks of a FP and a true-positive (TP) result after seven examinations. Data from 66 472 women age 58 to 59 years were used to extrapolate to 11 examinations. Participation, detection and additional FP rates were calculated for women who previously received FP results compared to women with true negative (TN) results. After 7 examinations, the cumulative risk of a TP result was 3.7% and the cumulative risk of a FP result was 9.1%. After 11 examinations, this increased to 7.1% and 13.5%, respectively. Following a FP result, participation was lower (71%-81%) than following a TN result (>90%). In women with a FP result, more TP results (factor 1.59 [95% CI: 1.44-1.72]), more interval cancers (factor 1.66 [95% CI: 1.41-1.91]) and more FP results (factor 1.96 [95% CI: 1.87-2.05]) were found than in women with TN results. In conclusion, due to a low recall rate in the Netherlands, the cumulative risk of a FP recall is relatively low, while the cumulative risk of a TP result is comparable. Breast cancer diagnoses and FP results were more common in women with FP results than in women with TN results, while participation was lower.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Mamografia/métodos , Reações Falso-Positivas , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos
2.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev ; 30(4): 653-660, 2021 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33531436

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Limited research is available on the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening programs in Asian countries. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of Singapore's national mammography screening program, implemented in 2002, recommending annual screening between ages 40 and 49 and biennial screening between ages 50 and 69, and alternative screening scenarios taking into account important country-specific factors. METHODS: We used national data from Singapore in the MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis-Fatal diameter (MISCAN-Fadia) model to simulate 302 screening scenarios for 10 million women born between 1910 and 1969. Screening scenarios varied by starting and ending age, screening interval, and attendance. Outcome measures included life-years gained (LYG), breast cancer deaths averted, false positives, overdiagnosis, quality-adjusted life years (QALY), costs (in 2002 Singapore dollars; S$), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Costs and effects were calculated and discounted with 3% using a health care provider's perspective. RESULTS: Singapore's current screening program at observed attendance levels required 54,158 mammograms per 100,000 women, yielded 1,054 LYG, and averted 57 breast cancer deaths. At attendance rates ≥50%, the current program was near the efficiency frontier. Most scenarios on the efficiency frontier started screening at age 40. The ICERs of the scenarios on the efficiency frontiers ranged between S$10,186 and S$56,306/QALY, which is considered cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of S$70,000/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Singapore's current screening program lies near the efficiency frontier, and starting screening at age 40 or 45 is cost-effective. Furthermore, enhancing screening attendance rates would increase benefits while maintaining cost-effectiveness. IMPACT: Screening all women at age 40 or 45 is cost-efficient in Singapore, and a policy change may be considered.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Mamografia/economia , Programas de Rastreamento/economia , Adulto , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Singapura/epidemiologia
3.
Breast Cancer Res ; 22(1): 53, 2020 05 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32460821

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased substantially since the introduction of mammography screening. Nevertheless, little is known about the natural history of preclinical DCIS in the absence of biopsy or complete excision. METHODS: Two well-established population models evaluated six possible DCIS natural history submodels. The submodels assumed 30%, 50%, or 80% of breast lesions progress from undetectable DCIS to preclinical screen-detectable DCIS; each model additionally allowed or prohibited DCIS regression. Preclinical screen-detectable DCIS could also progress to clinical DCIS or invasive breast cancer (IBC). Applying US population screening dissemination patterns, the models projected age-specific DCIS and IBC incidence that were compared to Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data. Models estimated mean sojourn time (MST) in the preclinical screen-detectable DCIS state, overdiagnosis, and the risk of progression from preclinical screen-detectable DCIS. RESULTS: Without biopsy and surgical excision, the majority of DCIS (64-100%) in the preclinical screen-detectable state progressed to IBC in submodels assuming no DCIS regression (36-100% in submodels allowing for DCIS regression). DCIS overdiagnosis differed substantially between models and submodels, 3.1-65.8%. IBC overdiagnosis ranged 1.3-2.4%. Submodels assuming DCIS regression resulted in a higher DCIS overdiagnosis than submodels without DCIS regression. MST for progressive DCIS varied between 0.2 and 2.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the majority of screen-detectable but unbiopsied preclinical DCIS lesions progress to IBC and that the MST is relatively short. Nevertheless, due to the heterogeneity of DCIS, more research is needed to understand the progression of DCIS by grades and molecular subtypes.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/epidemiologia , Carcinoma Ductal de Mama/patologia , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/epidemiologia , Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante/patologia , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos de Coortes , Progressão da Doença , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incidência , Uso Excessivo dos Serviços de Saúde , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Estatísticos , Prognóstico , Programa de SEER , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
4.
J Gen Intern Med ; 34(11): 2374-2381, 2019 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31385214

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Women with Down syndrome have a lower breast cancer risk and significantly lower life expectancies than women without Down syndrome. Therefore, it is not clear whether mammography screening strategies used for women without Down syndrome would benefit women with Down syndrome in the same way. OBJECTIVE: To determine the benefits and harms of various mammography screening strategies for women with Down syndrome using collaborative simulation modeling. DESIGN: Two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) simulation models estimated the benefits and harms of various screening strategies for women with Down syndrome over a lifetime horizon. PARTICIPANTS: We modeled a hypothetical cohort of US women with Down syndrome who were born in 1970. INTERVENTIONS: Annual, biennial, triennial, and one-time digital mammography screenings during the ages 40-74. MAIN MEASURES: The models estimated numbers of mammograms, false-positives, benign biopsies, breast cancer deaths prevented, and life-years gained per 1000 screened women when compared with no screening. KEY RESULTS: In average-risk women 50-74, biennial screening incurred 122 mammograms, 10 false-positive mammograms, and 1.4 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening. In women with Down syndrome, the same screening strategy incurred 2752 mammograms, 242 false-positive mammograms, and 34 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening. The harm/benefit ratio varied for other screening strategies, and was most favorable for one-time screening at age 50, which incurred 1629 mammograms, 144 false-positive mammograms, and 20 benign biopsies per one life-year gained compared with no screening. CONCLUSIONS: The harm/benefit ratios for various mammography screening strategies in women with Down syndrome are not as favorable as those for average-risk women. The benefit of screening mammography for women with Down syndrome is less pronounced due to lower breast cancer risk and shorter life expectancy.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico por imagem , Síndrome de Down , Mamografia/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos de Casos e Controles , Simulação por Computador , Feminino , Humanos , Expectativa de Vida , Mamografia/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição de Risco
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA