Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Effectiveness of clinical breast examination as a 'stand-alone' screening modality: an overview of systematic reviews.
Ngan, Tran Thu; Nguyen, Nga T Q; Van Minh, Hoang; Donnelly, Michael; O'Neill, Ciaran.
Afiliação
  • Ngan TT; Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK. ntran02@qub.ac.uk.
  • Nguyen NTQ; Centre for Population Health Sciences, Hanoi University of Public Health, Hanoi, Viet Nam. ntran02@qub.ac.uk.
  • Van Minh H; Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
  • Donnelly M; Department of Pharmaceutical Administration, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
  • O'Neill C; Centre for Population Health Sciences, Hanoi University of Public Health, Hanoi, Viet Nam.
BMC Cancer ; 20(1): 1070, 2020 Nov 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33167942
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of clinical breast examination (CBE) and conflicting recommendations regarding its usefulness as a screening tool for breast cancer. This paper provides an overview of systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of CBE as a 'stand-alone' screening modality for breast cancer compared to no screening and focused on its value in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS:

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews reporting the effectiveness of CBE published prior to October 29, 2019. The main outcomes assessed were mortality and down staging. The AMSTAR 2 checklist was used to assess the methodological quality of the reviews including risk of bias.

RESULTS:

Eleven systematic reviews published between 1993 and 2019 were identified. There was no direct evidence that CBE reduced breast cancer mortality. Indirect evidence suggested that a well-performed CBE achieved the same effect as mammography regarding mortality despite its apparently lower sensitivity (40-69% for CBE vs 77-95% for mammography). Greater sensitivity was recorded among younger and Asian women. Moreover, CBE contributed between 17 and 47% of the shift from advanced to early stage cancer.

CONCLUSIONS:

CBE merits attention from health system and service planners in LMICs where a national screening programme based on mammography would be prohibitively expensive. In particular, it is likely that considerable value would be gained from conducting implementation scientific research in countries with large numbers of Asian women and/or where younger women are at higher risk. REGISTRATION PROSPERO, registration number CRD42019126798 .
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / Autoexame de Mama / Análise Custo-Benefício / Detecção Precoce de Câncer Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / Autoexame de Mama / Análise Custo-Benefício / Detecção Precoce de Câncer Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Reino Unido