Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2023 article

Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening revisited: a large, retrospective cross-sectional study quantifying treatment intensity in women with screen-detected versus non-screen-detected cancer in Australia and New Zealand

5Citations signalées, ce qui n’est pas une note de qualité
6Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Rattachement africain : au. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.

Le résumé fourni par la source

Objectives: Non-mortality benefits of breast cancer screening are rarely considered in assessments of benefits versus harms. This study aims to estimate the rate of overdiagnosis in women with screen-detected breast cancer (SDBC) by allocating cases to either possibly overdiagnosed (POD) or not overdiagnosed categories and to compare treatment recommendations for surgery and adjuvant treatments by category, age at diagnosis and cancer stage. Methods and analysis: Retrospective secondary analysis of 10 191 women diagnosed with breast cancer in Australia and New Zealand in 2018. Treatment recommendations for 5226 women with SDBC and 4965 women with non-SDBC (NSDBC) were collated and analysed. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate proportions and risk ratios (RRs). Results: The POD rate was 15.8%. Screening detected 66.3% of stage 0 tumours, 59% of stage 1, 40% of stage 2 and 27.5% of stage 3 tumours. Women with SDBC were less likely than their NSDBC counterparts to receive chemotherapy (RR 0.60 Aus/0.53 NZ), immunotherapy (mostly human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor therapy) (RR 0.58 Aus/0.82 NZ), mastectomy (RR 0.55 Aus/0.63 NZ) and axillary lymph node dissection (RR 0.49 Aus/0.52 NZ), or to require both mastectomy and radiotherapy (RR 0.41 Aus/0.34 NZ). Less than 1% of POD women were recommended chemotherapy, 9.5% radiotherapy, 6.4% endocrine therapy, 2.2% mastectomy and 0.5% axillary lymph node dissection. Conclusions: Women with SDBCs required less intensive treatment; rates of possible overtreatment of SDBCs are relatively low and may be minimised through multidisciplinary discussion and shared decision-making. Reduced treatment intensity should be considered when balancing the potential benefits and harms of screening.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening revisited: a large, retrospective cross-sectional study quantifying treatment intensity in women with screen-detected versus non-screen-detected cancer in Australia and New Zealand
Date Crossref
01/12/2023
Éditeur
BMJ
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Les institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Les sujets associés

Global Cancer Incidence and ScreeningBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesBreast Lesions and Carcinomas

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Les publications sont interrogées à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, AfricArXiv, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé d’accès. OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant n’est nécessaire et aucune donnée externe n’est enregistrée en base. Consulter les sources et leurs limites.