Lancet (London, England) · 2000
Hormone replacement therapy and accuracy of mammographic screening.
СтатьяПоддержка 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.
Kavanagh A M, Mitchell H, Giles G G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is commonly used and may affect the accuracy of mammographic screening.
METHODS: We examined the sensitivity, specificity, and small-cancer detection rate according to HRT use in 103,770 women in Victoria, Australia, who attended first-round screening in 1994 and who did not have a personal history of breast cancer or a breast lump or a bloodstained or watery nipple discharge at the time of screening. BreastScreen Victoria provides mammography to women aged 40 years and older every 2 years. Unconditional logistic modelling was used to adjust for age, family history, and symptom status.
FINDINGS: The sensitivity of screening mammography for a 2-year screening interval was lower in HRT users (64.8% [95% CI 58-72]) than non-users (77.3% [74-81]). In the target group (50-69 years), the sensitivity was 64.3% (57-72) in HRT users and 79.8% (76-84) in non-users. Among women who were diagnosed with cancer during the 2-year screening interval, HRT users were more likely to have a false negative result than non-users (odds ratio 1.60 [1.04-2.21]) after adjusting for potential confounding factors. Specificity was 0.6% lower in HRT users compared with non-users. Among women who did not have cancer diagnosed in the interval, HRT users were more likely to have a false positive result (adjusted odds ratio 1.12 [1.05-1.19]).
INTERPRETATION: We show that HRT use reduces the sensitivity of mammographic screening. In countries where HRT use is widespread, the reduction in sensitivity with HRT use may undermine the capacity of population-based mammographic-screening programmes to realise their potential mortality benefit.
METHODS: We examined the sensitivity, specificity, and small-cancer detection rate according to HRT use in 103,770 women in Victoria, Australia, who attended first-round screening in 1994 and who did not have a personal history of breast cancer or a breast lump or a bloodstained or watery nipple discharge at the time of screening. BreastScreen Victoria provides mammography to women aged 40 years and older every 2 years. Unconditional logistic modelling was used to adjust for age, family history, and symptom status.
FINDINGS: The sensitivity of screening mammography for a 2-year screening interval was lower in HRT users (64.8% [95% CI 58-72]) than non-users (77.3% [74-81]). In the target group (50-69 years), the sensitivity was 64.3% (57-72) in HRT users and 79.8% (76-84) in non-users. Among women who were diagnosed with cancer during the 2-year screening interval, HRT users were more likely to have a false negative result than non-users (odds ratio 1.60 [1.04-2.21]) after adjusting for potential confounding factors. Specificity was 0.6% lower in HRT users compared with non-users. Among women who did not have cancer diagnosed in the interval, HRT users were more likely to have a false positive result (adjusted odds ratio 1.12 [1.05-1.19]).
INTERPRETATION: We show that HRT use reduces the sensitivity of mammographic screening. In countries where HRT use is widespread, the reduction in sensitivity with HRT use may undermine the capacity of population-based mammographic-screening programmes to realise their potential mortality benefit.