Distribution of cervical and breast cancer risk factors in women and their screening behaviours

Breast cancer and cervical cancer are important causes of cancer‐related mortality in women all over the world. The present study was conducted in order to investigate the distribution of cervical and breast cancer risk factors in women and their knowledge and behaviours about cancer screening methods. The study is cross‐sectional in nature. It was conducted with the participation of 1,886 women in Turkey. Data were collected through a questionnaire. The knowledge and behaviours of women aged 40 and over about breast cancer or cervical cancer screening methods were investigated according to the education level; results showed that the rates of those who knew and did breast self‐examination were significantly lower in illiterate women. Besides, the rates of women who did breast self‐examination were significantly lower in those who were aged 40 and over, and the rates of those who had clinical breast examination and Pap smear test were significantly lower in women aged 39 and below (p < 0.01). This study identified the most notable breast and cervical cancer risk factors as low education levels, high number of deliveries, short breastfeeding period, obesity and low socio‐economic level. For this reason, public health policies should be developed to minimise these risk factors.     

Breast cancer screening uptake in women at increased risk of developing hereditary breast cancer

This multicenter study assessed breast cancer screening uptake in 461 unaffected women at increased risk of developing breast cancer on the basis of family history who approached familial cancer clinics for advice about surveillance options. At the time of attending the clinic, 89% and 90% of participants were vigilant with respect to age- and risk-specific recommendations for mammography and clinical breast examination, respectively, and 51% reported practicing breast self-examination monthly or more frequently. The degree to which health outcomes are perceived to be under one's personal control (²=–2.09, p=0.0037) and breast cancer anxiety (²=8.11,p=0.044) were both associated with monthly or more frequent breast self-examination, while there were no associations with sociodemographic characteristics. A significantly lower percentage (56%) of women aged <30 were vigilant with respect to mammography recommendations, compared to 77%, 96% and 98% of women aged 30–39, 40–49 and >50, respectively (²=37.2,p<0.0001). These relatively low rates of mammographic screening in young women may reflect concerns about increased cancer risk associated with early and repeated radiation exposure or lack of sensitivity in young women with radiographically dense breasts. If mammographic screening is ultimately shown to lower mortality in women at high risk, there will be a strong case to promote screening in young women. The need for regular mammographic screening would then need to be highlighted and reinforced amongst young women and their referring physicians. Awareness amongst general practitioners, who are largely responsible for referral to screening services, would also need to be increased.     

Awareness of breast and cervical cancer risk factors and screening behaviours among nurses in rural region of Turkey

Breast and cervical cancer are the most common causes of cancer mortality among women worldwide, but actually they are largely preventable diseases. There is limited data on breast and cervical cancer knowledge, screening practices and attitudes of nurses in Turkey. A self-administered questionnaire was used to investigate the knowledge and attitude of nurses on risk factors of the breast and cervical cancer as well as screening programmes such as breast self-examination (BSE), clinical breast examination, mammography (MMG) and papanicolaou (pap) smear test. In total, 125 out of 160 nurses participated in the study (overall response rate was 80.6%). The risk factors and symptoms of breast cancer was generally well known, except for early menarche (23.2%) and late menopause (28.8%). For cervical cancer, the correct risk factors mostly indicated by the nurses were early age at first sexual intercourse (56%), smoking (76%), multiple sexual partners (71.2%). As for screening methods, it was believed that BSE was a beneficial method to identify the early breast changes (84.8%) and MMG was able to detect the cancer without a palpable mass (57.6%). Little was known about the fact that women should begin cervical cancer screening approximately 3 years after the onset of sexual intercourse (23.2%) and if repeated pap smear test were normal, it could be done every 2–3 years. Most of the nurses considered that MMG decreases the mortality in breast cancer (65.6%) and also believed that pap smear test decreases the mortality in cervical cancer (75.2%). Despite high level of knowledge of breast cancer risk factors, symptoms and screening methods, inadequate knowledge of cervical cancer screening method were found among nurses.     

Development of a screening instrument for risk factors of persistent pain after breast cancer surgery

Background:

Persistent postsurgical pain can have a significant effect on the quality of life of women being treated for breast cancer. The aim of this prospective study was to develop a screening tool to identify presurgical demographic, psychological and treatment-related factors that predict persistence of significant pain in the operated area after 6 months from surgery.

Methods:

Background and self-reported questionnaire data were collected the day before surgery and combined with treatment-related data. Pain in the operated area was assessed 6 months after surgery with a questionnaire. The Bayesian model was used for the development of a screening tool.

Results:

Report of preoperative chronic pain, more than four or more previous operations, preoperative pain in the area to be operated, high body mass index, previous smoking and older age were included in the six-factor model that best predicted significant pain at the follow-up in the 489 women studied.

Conclusion:

A six-factor risk index was developed to estimate the risk of developing significant pain after breast cancer surgery. Neither treatment- nor mood-related variables were included in the model. Identification of risk factors may lead to prevention of persistent postsurgery pain. This tool could be used for target prevention to those who are at the highest risk of developing persistent postsurgery pain.     

Gail model breast cancer risk components are poor predictors of risk perception and screening behavior

Summary The Gail model is being used increasingly to determine individual breast cancer risk and to tailor preventive health recommendations accordingly. Although widely known to the medical and biostatistical communities, the risk factors included in the model may not be salient to the women to whom the model is being applied. This study explored the relationship of the individual Gail model risk factors to perceived risk of breast cancer and prior breast cancer screening among women with a family history of breast cancer. Data from baseline interviews with 969 women found a striking disparity between the objective risk factors included in the model and the accuracy of perceived risk and screening behaviors of this population, particularly among women over the age of 50 years.Risk perception accuracy was unrelated to all of the Gail model risk factors for all age groups. Reported mammography adherence was only associated with having had a breast biopsy in both age groups. Breast self examination (BSE) practice was independent of all measured factors for both age groups. These findings support the need for further research to identify additional determinants of risk perception and motivators of screening behavior.     

Established breast cancer risk factors by clinically important tumour characteristics

Breast cancer is a morphologically and clinically heterogeneous disease; however, it is less clear how risk factors relate to tumour features. We evaluated risk factors by tumour characteristics (histopathologic type, grade, size, and nodal status) in a population-based case-control of 2386 breast cancers and 2502 controls in Poland. Use of a novel extension of the polytomous logistic regression permitted simultaneous modelling of multiple tumour characteristics. Late age at first full-term birth was associated with increased risk of large (> 2 cm) tumours (odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) 1.19 (1.07-1.33) for a 5-year increase in age), but not smaller tumours (P for heterogeneity adjusting for other tumour features (Phet) = 0.007). On the other hand, multiparity was associated with reduced risk for small tumours (0.76 (0.68-0.86) per additional birth; Phet = 0.004). Consideration of all tumour characteristics simultaneously revealed that current or recent use of combined hormone replacement therapy was associated with risk of small (2.29 (1.66-3.15)) and grade 1 (3.36 (2.22-5.08)) tumours (Phet = 0.05 for size and 0.0008 for grade 1 vs 3), rather than specific histopathologic types (Phet = 0.63 for ductal vs lobular). Finally, elevated body mass index was associated with larger tumour size among both pre- and postmenopausal women (Phet = 0.05 and 0.0001, respectively). None of these relationships were explained by hormone receptor status of the tumours. In conclusion, these data support distinctive risk factor relationships by tumour characteristics of prognostic relevance. These findings might be useful in developing targeted prevention efforts.     

Incidence and tumour stages of breast cancer in the region of Aachen, Germany

We present epidemiological data of female breast cancer in the region of Aachen (Germany) including incidence and tumour stages for the period 1996-1997. Furthermore, we compare epidemiological data from Aachen with data from the directly neighbouring Dutch region South-Middle Limburg before and after the introduction of a national mammographic screening programme. The field study of breast cancer was undertaken at the Institute of Pathology and Comprehensive Cancer Center at the University of Aachen, supported by the Federal Ministry of Health (Germany), using data files from the Cancer Registry Aachen. The patient's consent to collect all data concerning her epidemiological and social situation as well as information on the outcome of disease was obtained in 83.4% of all cases. The remaining 16.6% of the cases without a patient's consent are based on histopathological reports. Only those patients are included who were documented as residing in the region of Aachen at the time of diagnosis. Tumour cases were counted according to International Agency for Research on Cancer rules and tumour stages are classified according to UICC guidelines. Incidence rates are calculated as crude value, adapted to the European and World Standard population (ESR, WSR), and the age specific incidence is presented in 5-year intervals. The cumulative risk is assessed for a certain life span by summarizing the age-specific incidences. The age-standardized breast cancer incidence rate in Aachen was 94 per 100 000 women in 1996 and 90 cases of invasive breast cancer per 100 000 women in 1997 according to the ESR. The cumulative risk of developing breast cancer in the life span ranging from 0 to 74 years is approximately 8%. The stage distribution of breast cancer reveals only 4% favourable carcinomata in situ, but 12% advanced T4 tumours. T1 and T2 tumour stages count for about 40% and T3 tumour stages about 4%. Incidence rates and the tumour stages of breast cancer in the region of Aachen during 1996 and 1997 are similar to the data obtained from the directly neighbouring Cancer Center of the region South-Middle Limburg, in the Netherlands, in 1989/1990 before the beginning of the national breast cancer screening programme. However, major differences are found in terms of the incidence and the tumour stages between Aachen 1996/1997 and South-Middle Limburg 1995/1996 after the introduction of the mammographic screening. The incidence of female breast cancer in Aachen, Germany, was high and in the range of the data from other cancer registries in Europe without national screening programmes. The tumour stages at diagnosis in Aachen were not very favourable, especially in elderly women. An increase of the cancer incidence and a shift of the tumour stages to more favourable ones were observed in the neighbouring Dutch region of South-Middle Limburg, comparing data from 1989/90 and 1995/96. This is probably as a result of the national mammographic screening programme. As data from Aachen were similar to Limburg's data from 1989/90 before the mammographic screening was introduced, it will be important to follow and compare the cancer incidence and the tumour stages in the future.     

First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging

Women with a genetic predisposition for breast cancer are often advised surveillance with physical examination twice a year and mammography once a year from 25 years onwards. However, the sensitivity of the mammography decreases when breast tissue is dense and this is seen in 40–50% of women under 50 years. We therefore investigated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in addition to the normal surveillance could detect cancers otherwise missed. In 109 women with over 25% risk of breast cancer, MRI was performed because over 50% dense breast tissue was seen at mammography and no suspect lesion was seen at the previous screening. MRI detected breast cancers in three patients (2.8%) occult at mammography and with no new palpable tumor, twice at stage T1bN0 and T1cN0 once. Two cancers were expected. MRI was false positive in six women, resulting in two benign local excisions because ultrasound or fine needle examination confirmed suspicion. We had no false negative MRI results. MRI proved true benign in four BRCA 1/2 gene mutation carriers at histologic examination. Preoperative wire localization of the malignancies detected at MRI proved necessary as the tumor was not palpable in the lumpectomy specimen nor visible at specimen radiology. The extra cost of breast MRI in addition to mammography and physical examination was uro13.930 per detected cancer. The cost of the detection of one breast cancer patient in our national screening program is uro9000. During follow-up of patients with a familial risk in whom the first breast cancer was detected at MRI, MRI detected two recurrent cancers in stage T1bN0 and T1cN0 and one contralateral cancer T1aNo. Breast MRI is promising in screening young women at high risk for breast cancer, as it can advance the detection of cancers still occult at mammography and physical examination; but the cost may be considerable.     

Effects of screening for breast cancer on its age-incidence relationships and familial risk

Mammographic screening programs for breast cancer have been implemented in many countries and opportunistic mammographies are taken as a diagnostic method. The consequences of the wide application of this technology to age-incidence relationships in breast cancer have not been clarified nor is its effect on familial risk estimation. It was assumed that if screening and diagnostic methods bias familial risk, the highest risk should be noted for sisters diagnosed close in time. Age-specific incidence data were collected from the EUCAN database and from cancer registries of Finland, Norway and Sweden. The Swedish Family-Cancer Database was used to analyse risks for breast cancer among sisters, depending on the time since the first sister was diagnosed with breast cancer. Age-incidence patterns deviated between Germany, with low mammographic coverage, and Sweden, the Netherlands, the UK and France, with variable levels of coverage. The annual age-incidence patterns in Finland, Norway and Sweden changed in concert with the targeted mammographic service. The risk of breast cancer for women with an affected sister, diagnosed between ages 50 to 64 years, was significantly higher within the same or the subsequent year of the sister's diagnosis compared to 5+ years, accounting for 7.3% of all patients. The ordered increase in age-specific incidence of breast cancer in the women targeted by screening studied suggests that mammographic screening is one important factor responsible for the shift of the age of onset for breast cancer towards middle age. However, the effects on the estimation of familial risk are so far small.     

Breast density and risk of breast cancer

Early studies reported a 4- to 6-fold risk of breast cancer between women with extremely dense and fatty breasts. As most early studies were case-control studies, we took advantage of a population-based screening program to study density and breast cancer incidence in a cohort design. In the Capital Region, Denmark, women aged 50 to 69 are invited to screening biennially. Women screened November 2012 to December 2017 were included, and classified by BI-RADS density code, version 4, at first screen after recruitment. Women were followed up for incident breast cancer, including ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), to 2020 in nationwide pathology data. Rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were compared across density groups using Poisson-regression. We included 189 609 women; 1 067 282 person-years; and 4110 incident breast cancers/DCIS. Thirty-three percent of women had BI-RADS density code 1; 38% code 2; 24% code 3; 4.7% code 4; and missing 0.3%. Using women with BI-RADS density code 1 as baseline; women with code 2 had RR 1.69 (95% CI 1.56-1.84); women with code 3, RR 2.06 (95% CI 1.89-2.25); and women with code 4, RR 2.37 (95% CI 1.05-2.74). Results differed between observations accumulated during screening and above screening age. Our results indicated less difference in breast cancer risk across level of breast density than normally stated. Translated into absolute risk of breast cancer after age 50, we found a 6.2% risk for the one-third of women with lowest density, and 14.7% for the 5% of women with highest density.     

山西省襄垣县宫颈癌和乳腺癌联合筛查效果初探

目的 通过分析为国家宫颈癌和乳腺癌筛查提供基本评价数据.方法 2009～2010年山西省襄垣县妇幼保健院对该县30～59岁妇女通过醋酸/碘染色后肉眼观察方法开展宫颈癌筛查,阳性者转诊阴道镜,镜下有病变时取活检,以病理诊断为金标准.对35～59岁的妇女开展乳腺癌筛查,以临床检查法为初筛方法,怀疑阳性者通过超声或乳腺X线进行诊断.结果 2009年完成1993名妇女的宫颈癌筛查,其中宫颈上皮内瘤变2级(CIN2)及以上病变的患病率为1.6%,早诊率为100%,第2年复查率为91%,仅查出1例CIN2,未查出更高病变,早诊率达100%.完成1819名妇女的乳腺癌筛查,乳腺良性病变9例(4.02%),良性肿瘤3例(1.34%);2010年完成2026名妇女的乳腺癌筛查,良性病变103例(13.57%),良性肿瘤14例(1.84%),可疑恶性1例.结论 该县宫颈癌的筛查效果明显,乳腺癌筛查仍需加强技术培训.筛查体系和技术队伍建设是基层单位承担农村妇女健康保健服务的关键.     

Mammography screening in the Netherlands: delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after breast cancer screening

In a prospective study we determined the frequency and causes of delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer after suspicious screening mammography. We included all women aged 50-75 years who underwent biennial screening mammography in the southern breast cancer screening region of the Netherlands between 1 January 1996 and 1 January 2002. Clinical data, breast imaging reports, biopsy results and breast surgery reports were collected of all women with a positive screening result with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Of 153 969 mammographic screening examinations, 1615 (1.05%) were positive screens. Breast cancer was diagnosed in 770 (47.9%) of 1607 women for whom follow-up information was available, yielding a cancer detection rate of 5.0 per 1000 women screened. Breast cancer was diagnosed within 3 months following a positive screen in 722 cases (93.8%). The diagnostic delay was 4-6, 7-12 and 13-24 months, respectively, in 11 (1.4%), 24 (3.1%) and nine (1.2%) patients. In four other patients (0.5%), breast cancer was diagnosed after a repeat positive screen, resulting in a diagnostic delay of 25-27 months. Reasons for a diagnostic delay >3 months were erroneous mammographic interpretation of suspicious lesions as benign or probably benign lesions (33 cases), benign biopsies from a malignant lesion (10), and omission to biopsy or remove a lesion that was suspicious at breast imaging (4) or core biopsy (1). We conclude that there is room for improvement in the workup of patients with a positive screening mammography, as seen from data in this screening region. To improve the workup, we suggest that other breast cancer screening programmes also identify delay in breast cancer diagnosis after a positive screen.     

Evaluation of The Netherlands breast cancer screening programme.

The Netherlands breast cancer screening programme for women aged 50-75 years was gradually implemented during 1989-1997. Short-term indicators for this mammography screening are 80% attendance (800 000 examinations yearly), and for the subsequent screening examinations 7.4 referrals for clinical assessment per 1000 women screened, 4.7 biopsies and 3.6 breast cancers detected. Breast cancer mortality in The Netherlands has been decreasing since 1997 after having been stable for decades. The challenge now is to disentangle the relative contributions of mammographic screening, earlier clinical diagnosis, less aggressive tumours, treatment advances and risk factors towards this decline.     

Building a model to determine the cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening in France

This paper describes the methods and initial validation of a cost-effectiveness model developed to simulate the breast cancer screening situation in France. The first screening pilot programmes were set up in France in 1989 to test the feasibility of a decentralized screening model based in a large number of existing non-dedicated radiology centres. The present cost-effectiveness model was built as a tool to help guide current policy discussions on the future of screening in France. This Markov model compares the costs and effects expected when a screening programme is offered to a given cohort of women to those expected in the absence of screening. The model was initially validated using current results from the Bas-Rhin screening programme and local cancer registry epidemiological data. Over a 20-year period, 315 274 women would attend for screening, of whom 12 491 would be recalled for further assessment. 4423 cancers would be detected, resulting in 637 deaths. Screening allows the detection of 106 additional cancer cases, thereby preventing 92 deaths, and saves 1522 life-years compared with a situation without screening. Breast cancer mortality is reduced by 12.6%, yielding a cost-effectiveness ratio of 137 000 FF per life-year saved. The results of initial analyses suggest that the model is capable of suitably assessing the impact of breast cancer screening in terms of costs and effects. Further scenario analyses are needed to understand the impact of screening policy changes on the costs and effectiveness of future screening programmes.     

Impact of screening mammography on breast cancer mortality

The degree to which observed reductions in breast cancer mortality is attributable to screening mammography has become increasingly controversial. We examined this issue with three fundamentally different approaches: (i) Chronology—the temporal relationship of the onset of breast cancer mortality decline and the national implementation of screening mammography; (ii) Magnitude—the degree to which breast cancer mortality declined relative to the amount (penetration) of screening mammography; (iii) Analogy—the pattern of mortality rate reductions of other cancers for which population screening is not conducted. Chronology and magnitude were assessed with data from Europe and North America, with three methods applied to magnitude. A comparison of eight countries in Europe and North America does not demonstrate a correlation between the penetration of national screening and either the chronology or magnitude of national breast cancer mortality reduction. In the United States, the magnitude of the mortality decline is greater in the unscreened, younger women than in the screened population and regional variation in the rate of breast cancer mortality reduction is not correlated with screening penetrance, either as self‐reported or by the magnitude of screening‐induced increase in early‐stage disease. Analogy analysis of United States data identifies 14 other cancers with a similar distinct onset of mortality reduction for which screening is not performed. These five lines of evidence from three different approaches and additional observations discussed do not support the hypothesis that mammography screening is a primary reason for the breast cancer mortality reduction in Europe and North America.     

Specialisation and breast cancer survival in the screening era

It is recommended that specialist surgeons treat all breast cancer, although the limited evidence to support this is based on treatment patterns prior to the introduction of screening. Whether a specialist survival advantage exists in the post-screening era is uncertain, as referral and treatment patterns may have changed, in addition to the effect of screening on the natural history of breast cancer. Our aim was to determine the impact of screening on the caseload and case-mix of specialist surgeons, to determine if the survival advantage associated with specialist care is maintained with longer follow-up and persists after the introduction of screening. Using the West of Scotland Cancer Registry, all 7197 women treated for breast cancer in a 15-year time period (1980-1994) in a geographically defined cohort were followed up for an average of 9 years, and pathological stage and socioeconomic status were linked with mortality data. We show that the caseload of specialists has increased substantially (from 11 to 59% of the total workload) and that smaller cancers have been selectively referred. However, even after allowing for pathological stage, socioeconomic status and method of detection, specialist treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of dying (prescreening: relative risk of dying=0.83, 95% CI=0.75-0.92; post-screening: relative risk of dying=0.89, 95% CI=0.78-1.00). We conclude that this survival benefit is most consistent with effective surgical management rather than selective referral, the influx of screen-detected cancers or adjuvant therapies.     

Towards personalized screening: Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes in women with and without a first‐degree relative with a history of breast cancer

Several reviews have estimated the balance of benefits and harms of mammographic screening in the general population. The balance may, however, differ between individuals with and without family history. Therefore, our aim is to assess the cumulative risk of screening outcomes; screen‐detected breast cancer, interval cancer, and false‐positive results, in women screenees aged 50–75 and 40–75, with and without a first‐degree relative with a history of breast cancer at the start of screening. Data on screening attendance, recall and breast cancer detection were collected for each woman living in Nijmegen (The Netherlands) since 1975. We used a discrete time survival model to calculate the cumulative probability of each major screening outcome over 19 screening rounds. Women with a family history of breast cancer had a higher risk of all screening outcomes. For women screened from age 50–75, the cumulative risk of screen‐detected breast cancer, interval cancer and false‐positive results were 9.0, 4.4 and 11.1% for women with a family history and 6.3, 2.7 and 7.3% for women without a family history, respectively. The results for women 40–75 followed the same pattern for women screened 50–75 for cancer outcomes, but were almost doubled for false‐positive results. To conclude, women with a first‐degree relative with a history of breast cancer are more likely to experience benefits and harms of screening than women without a family history. To complete the balance and provide risk‐based screening recommendations, the breast cancer mortality reduction and overdiagnosis should be estimated for family history subgroups.     

Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

Background:

The United Kingdom NHS Breast Screening Programme was established in 1988, and women aged between 50 and 70 are routinely invited at three yearly intervals. Expected United Kingdom interval cancer rates have been calculated previously, but this is the first publication from an exercise to collate individual-based interval cancer data at a national level.

Methods:

Interval cancer case ascertainment is achieved by the regular exchange of data between Regional Breast Screening Quality Assurance Reference Centres and Cancer Registries. The present analysis includes interval cancers identified in women screened between 1st April 1997 and 31st March 2003, who were aged between 50 and 64 at the time of their last routine screen.

Results:

In the periods >0–<12 months, 12–<24 months and 24–<36 months after a negative screen, we found overall interval cancer rates and regional ranges of 0.55 (0.43–0.76), 1.13 (0.92–1.47) and 1.22 (0.93–1.57) per 1000 women screened, respectively. Rates in the period 33–<36 months showed a decline, possibly associated with early re-screening or delayed presentation.

Conclusions:

Interval cancer rates were higher than the expected rates in the 24-month period after a negative screen, but were similar to published results from other countries. Increases in background incidence may mean that the expected rates are underestimated. It is also possible that, as a result of incomplete case ascertainment, interval cancers rates were underestimated in some regions in which rates were less than the expected.