Revue d'epidemiologie et de sante publique · 2001
Initial results of a study into the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in a population identified to be at high risk.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Myles J, Duffy S, Nixon R, Boggis C, Howell A, Shenton A, Evans G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Women are frequently referred to genetic clinics because of a family history of breast or ovarian cancer, conferring a moderate increased risk of the disease, but not sufficient in itself to indicate gene mutation analysis. One possible management strategy is to offer regular mammographic screening, possibly earlier in life and more frequently than in the general population. This strategy is used in many parts of the UK, although it has not been formally evaluated.
METHODS: In this paper we present some early results on the effectiveness of a programme of mammography in 2,998 women aged 19-71 with a moderate family history of breast cancer in Manchester. We estimated the test and programme sensitivity and sojourn time, using different statistical methods.
RESULTS: Fifty breast cancers were diagnosed. The incidence rate observed was 4.46 per thousand person-years. The incidence expected from the segregation analysis of Claus et al. was 3.75 per thousand person-years. Screen-detection rates at first and subsequent screens were 5.00 and 4.93 per thousand respectively. Interval cancer incidence in the first year following a negative screen was 0.91 per thousand person-years. Screening test sensitivity was estimated conservatively as 83%, programme sensitivity as 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: Early indications are that the programme is likely to be effective. Further follow-up, analysis of tumour size, node status and malignancy grade, and subsequent mortality from breast cancer is required to confirm this.
METHODS: In this paper we present some early results on the effectiveness of a programme of mammography in 2,998 women aged 19-71 with a moderate family history of breast cancer in Manchester. We estimated the test and programme sensitivity and sojourn time, using different statistical methods.
RESULTS: Fifty breast cancers were diagnosed. The incidence rate observed was 4.46 per thousand person-years. The incidence expected from the segregation analysis of Claus et al. was 3.75 per thousand person-years. Screen-detection rates at first and subsequent screens were 5.00 and 4.93 per thousand respectively. Interval cancer incidence in the first year following a negative screen was 0.91 per thousand person-years. Screening test sensitivity was estimated conservatively as 83%, programme sensitivity as 70%.
CONCLUSIONS: Early indications are that the programme is likely to be effective. Further follow-up, analysis of tumour size, node status and malignancy grade, and subsequent mortality from breast cancer is required to confirm this.