Elissa M EM. Ozanne, Yiwey Y. Shieh, James J. Barnes, Colleen C. Bouzan, E Shelley ES. Hwang, Laura J LJ. Esserman.
Breast cancer research and treatment
2011 Aug; (129):165-73 1
The significant increase in the detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) since the introduction of screening mammography has not been accompanied by the anticipated reduction in invasive breast cancer (IBC) incidence. The prevalence of DCIS requires a reexamination of the population level effects of detecting and treating DCIS. To further our understanding of the possible impact of DCIS diagnosis and treatment on IBC incidence in the U.S., we simulated breast cancer incidence over 25 years under various assumptions regarding the baseline incidence of IBC and the progression of DCIS to IBC. The simulations demonstrate a tradeoff between the expected increased incidence of IBC absent any DCIS detection and treatment and the rate of progression of DCIS to IBC. Our analyses indicate that a high progression of DCIS to IBC implies a significant increase in incidence of IBC over what is observed had we not detected and treated DCIS. Conversely, if we assume that there would not have been a significant increase over and above the observed incidence evident in SEER, then our model indicates that the rate of DCIS progression to clinically significant IBC is low. Given the tradeoff illustrated by our model, we must reevaluate the assumption that DCIS is a short-term obligate precursor of invasive cancer and instead focus on further exploration of the true natural history of DCIS.
Bircan B. Erbas, Elena E. Provenzano, Jane J. Armes, Dorota D. Gertig.
Breast cancer research and treatment
2006 May; (97):135-44 2
Ductal carcinoma in situ represents about 20% of all tumours diagnosed within mammographic screening programs. The natural history of DCIS is poorly understood, as it cannot be observed directly. Estimates of the proportion of DCIS that progress to invasive cancer, as well as factors that may influence progression, are important for clinical management. Here we review various sources of evidence regarding the natural history of DCIS.
Virginia L VL. Ernster, Rachel R. Ballard-Barbash, William E WE. Barlow, Yingye Y. Zheng, Donald L DL. Weaver, Gary G. Cutter, Bonnie C BC. Yankaskas, Robert R. Rosenberg, Patricia A PA. Carney, Karla K. Kerlikowske, Stephen H SH. Taplin, Nicole N. Urban, Berta M BM. Geller.
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
2002 Oct; (94):1546-54 20
With the large number of women having mammography-an estimated 28.4 million U.S. women aged 40 years and older in 1998-the percentage of cancers detected as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which has an uncertain prognosis, has increased. We pooled data from seven regional mammography registries to determine the percentage of mammographically detected cancers that are DCIS and the rate of DCIS per 1000 mammograms.
L L. Nyström, L E LE. Rutqvist, S S. Wall, A A. Lindgren, M M. Lindqvist, S S. Rydén, I I. Andersson, N N. Bjurstam, G G. Fagerberg, J J. Frisell.
Lancet (London, England)
1993 Apr; (341):973-8 8851
Despite encouraging results from screening trials the efficacy of mammography in reducing mortality remains somewhat controversial. Five studies have been done in Sweden. This overview, based on 282,777 women followed for 5-13 years in randomised trials in Malmö, Kopparberg, Ostergötland, Stockholm, and Gothenburg, reveals a 24% (95% confidence interval 13-34%) significant reduction of breast cancer mortality among those invited to mammography screening compared with those not invited. To avoid the potential risk of differential misclassification causes of death were assessed by an independent end-point committee after a blinded review of all fatal breast cancer cases. The mortality reduction was similar, irrespective of the end-point used for evaluation ("breast cancer as underlying cause of death" or "breast cancer present at death"). There was a consistent risk reduction associated with screening in all studies, although the point estimate of the relative risk for all ages varied non-significantly between 0.68 and 0.84. The cumulative breast cancer mortality by time since randomisation was estimated at 1.3 per 1000 within 6 years in the invited group compared with 1.6 in the control group. The corresponding figures after 9 years are 2.6 and 3.3 and after 12 years 3.9 and 5.1. The largest reduction of breast cancer mortality (29%) was observed among women aged 50-69 at randomisation. Among women 40-49 there was a non-significant 13% reduction. In this younger age group cumulative breast cancer mortality was similar in the invited and control group during the first 8 years of follow-up. After 8 years there was a difference in favour of the invited women. There was no evidence of any detrimental effect of screening in terms of breast cancer mortality in any age group. Among women aged 70-74 years screening seems to have had only a marginal impact.