• Cancer · May 2003

    Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial

    The Gothenburg Breast Screening Trial.

    • Nils Bjurstam, Lena Björneld, Jane Warwick, Evis Sala, Stephen W Duffy, Lennarth Nyström, Neil Walker, Erling Cahlin, Olof Eriksson, Lars-Olof Hafström, Halvard Lingaas, Jan Mattsson, Stellan Persson, Carl-Magnus Rudenstam, Håkan Salander, Johan Säve-Söderbergh, and Torkel Wahlin.
    • Department of Radiology, Center for Breast Imaging, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway. nils.bjurstam@unn.no
    • Cancer. 2003 May 15;97(10):2387-96.

    BackgroundAlthough there is evidence for a reduction in breast carcinoma mortality with mammographic screening, some doubts have been expressed, and there is still uncertainty regarding the age specific effects.MethodsThe authors report on a randomized, controlled trial of mammographic screening for breast carcinoma that was conducted among 51,611 women (21,650 women who were invited to a screening [the study group] and 29,961 women in a control group) ages 39-59 years in Gothenburg, Sweden. Among women in the study group, the screening interval was 18 months. The screening phase of the trial took place in 1982-1991, and follow-up for breast carcinoma mortality continued until December 31, 1996. Mortality from breast carcinoma was analyzed using a Poisson regression model. Overall and age specific effects of invitation to mammography screening on breast carcinoma mortality were calculated. Three mortality effects were estimated: the effect on deaths from breast tumors diagnosed during the screening phase of the trial, as assessed by an independent Endpoint Committee (the EPC evaluation model); the effect on deaths from breast carcinoma diagnosed during the screening phase of the trial, as determined by data from the National Cancer Registry and the National Cause of Death Register (the SCB evaluation model); and the effect on deaths from all breast carcinomas diagnosed up to December 31, 1996, as determined by the National Cancer Registry and the National Cause of Death Register (the SCB follow-up model).ResultsA nonsignificant, 21% reduction in the rate of mortality from breast carcinoma with invitation to screening was observed using the EPC evaluation model (relative risk [RR], 0.79; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.58-1.08; P = 0.14); and a borderline significant, 23% rate reduction was observed using the SCB follow-up model (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.60-1.00; P = 0.05). Age specific analyses yielded greater mortality rate reductions for the groups of women ages 39-44 years, 45-49 years, and 55-59 years, but there was no mortality rate reduction in the group of women ages 50-54 years. The effects of invitation to mammographic screening on the incidence of lymph node-positive disease closely paralleled the effects of invitation on breast carcinoma mortality. The effect on breast carcinoma mortality was consistent with the effect on all-cause mortality, suggesting no bias in classification of cause of death. Breast carcinoma incidence in the study group was almost identical to the incidence in the control group after trial by screening had ended in the control group (RR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88-1.09; P = 0.7).ConclusionsThe current results support the commonly observed 20-30% reduction in breast carcinoma mortality with invitation to screening. The impression that screening is less effective in women younger than 50 years may be an oversimplification. Age specific effects should be a target for further research.Copyright 2003 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.11361

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.