Mammographic density in birth cohorts of Danish women: a longitudinal study

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the leading malignant disease among western women with incidence increasing over time. High mammographic density is a well-established risk factor for breast cancer. We explored trends in mammographic density across birth cohorts to gain further insight into possible time trends in women’s mammographic density that might explain the historical increase in breast cancer incidence. METHODS: Data derived from two mammography screening programs in Denmark from 1991 to 2001, including on average 41,091 women from Copenhagen and 52,938 women from Funen aged 50–69. Mammographic density was assessed qualitatively (fatty or mixed/dense) by senior screening radiologists. The proportion of women with mixed/dense mammographic density was calculated by age at screening, screening period, and birth cohort. The Generalized Estimating Equations were used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: The proportion of women with mixed/dense mammographic density increased from 45% among women born in the 1920s to 75-80% among women born in the 1940s. In Copenhagen, the age-adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) of mixed/dense mammographic density in women born in 1941–42 was 2.48 (2.22-2.76) compared with women born in 1921–22. In Funen, the age-adjusted odds ratio of mixed/dense mammographic density in women born in 1946–47 was 5.89 (5.32-6.51) compared with women born in 1924–25. Hormone use had a greater impact on mammographic density in birth cohorts of the 1920s compared with those of the 1940s. CONCLUSIONS: We found suggestive evidence of a birth cohort pattern in mammographic density and an attenuated impact of hormone use in younger compared with older birth cohorts suggesting that postmenopausal mammographic density could be linked to changing exposures accumulated over time in women’s lives

Reintervention or mortality within 90 days of bariatric surgery:population-based cohort study

Publisher's version (útgefin grein)Background: Bariatric surgery carries a risk of severe postoperative complications, sometimes leading to reinterventions or even death. The incidence and risk factors for reintervention and death within 90 days after bariatric surgery are unclear, and were examined in this study. Methods: This population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent bariatric surgery in one of the five Nordic countries between 1980 and 2012. Data on surgical and endoscopic procedures, diagnoses and mortality were retrieved from national high-quality and complete registries. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted for country, age, sex, co-morbidity, type of surgery and approach, year and hospital volume of bariatric surgery. Results: Of 49 977 patients, 1111 (2·2 per cent) had a reintervention and 95 (0·2 per cent) died within 90 days of bariatric surgery. Risk factors for the composite outcome reintervention/mortality were older age (HR 1·65, 95 per cent c.i. 1·36 to 2·01, for age at least 50 years versus less than 30 years) and co-morbidity (HR 2·66, 1·53 to 4·62, for Charlson co-morbidity index score 2 or more versus 0). The risk of reintervention/mortality was decreased for vertical banded gastroplasty compared with gastric bypass (HR 0·37, 0·28 to 0·48) and more recent surgery (HR 0·51, 0·39 to 0·67, for procedures undertaken in 2010 or later versus before 2000). Sex, surgical approach (laparoscopic versus open) and hospital volume did not influence risk of reintervention/mortality, but laparoscopic surgery was associated with a lower risk of 90-day mortality (HR 0·29, 0·16 to 0·53). Conclusion: Reintervention and death were uncommon events within 90 days of bariatric surgery even in this unselected nationwide cohort from five countries. Older patients with co-morbidities have an increased relative risk of these outcomes.This work was supported by research grants from the Vetenskapsrådet (D0547801), Nordic Cancer Union (154860) and Swedish Cancer Society (140322). The funding entities had no role in the design of the study, data collection, analysis or interpretation of the results, writing of the manuscript or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The data will not be made available publicly, but are available upon request from the authors. The research was not preregistered in an institutional registry.Peer Reviewe

Factors related to longitudinal adherence in colorectal cancer screening:qualitative research findings

Background: The effectiveness of screening in colorectal cancer prevention depends on sustained participation rates. The objective of this study was to explore factors related to the longitudinal adherence of screening behavior in the context of a biennial population-based cancer screening program. Methods: Eight focus groups were conducted with individuals who were invited two or three consecutive times to a population-based colorectal cancer screening program using a fecal occult blood test and who agreed to participate in the program at least once (n = 45). The criteria used to select the study members included adherence to fecal occult blood test maintenance, factors regarding their initial participation in the colorectal cancer screening, sex, and contextual educational level. Results: The participants expressed a high level of satisfaction with the program; however, they showed a low level of understanding with respect to cancer screening. Consulting a general practitioner was cited by all participants as an important factor that mediated their final decision or influenced their behavior as a whole with regard to the program. Fear played a different role in the screening behavior for regular and irregular adherent participants. In the adherent participants, fear facilitated their continued participation in the screening program, whereas for the irregular participants, fear led them to avoid or refuse further screening. Having a close person diagnosed with colorectal cancer was a facilitator for the regular adherent participants. The irregular adherent participants showed some relaxation with respect to screening after a negative result and considered that further screening was no longer necessary. Conclusion: Considering the importance of primary healthcare professionals in the decision regarding sustained participation, it is important to better engage them with cancer screening programs, as well as improve the communication channels to provide accurate and balanced information for both health professionals and individuals.</p

Overdiagnosis in organised mammography screening in Denmark. A comparative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Overdiagnosis in cancer screening is the detection of cancer lesions that would otherwise not have been detected. It is arguably the most important harm. We quantified overdiagnosis in the Danish mammography screening programme, which is uniquely suited for this purpose, as only 20% of the Danish population has been offered organised mammography screening over a long time-period.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We collected incidence rates of carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer in areas with and without screening over 13 years with screening (1991-2003), and 20 years before its introduction (1971-1990). We explored the incidence increase comparing unadjusted incidence rates and used Poisson regression analysis to compensate for the background incidence trend, variation in age distribution and geographical variation in incidence.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>For the screened age group, 50 to 69 years, we found an overdiagnosis of 35% when we compared unadjusted incidence rates for the screened and non-screened areas, but after compensating for a small decline in incidence in older, previously screened women. Our adjusted Poisson regression analysis indicated a relative risk of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.35-1.45) for the whole screening period, and a potential compensatory drop in older women of 0.90 (95% CI: 0.88-0.96), yielding an overdiagnosis of 33%, which we consider the most reliable estimate. The drop in previously screened women was only present in one of the two screened regions and was small in absolute numbers.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>One in four breast cancers diagnosed in the screened age group in the Danish screening programme is overdiagnosed. Our estimate for Denmark is lower than that for comparable countries, likely because of lower uptake, lower recall rates and lower detection rates of carcinoma in situ.</p

Anticipated regret to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening in Scotland (ARTICS): Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the UK. Screening is key to early detection. The Scottish programme of colorectal cancer screening is running successfully, and involves all adults aged between 50 and 74 years being invited to post back a faecal sample for testing every 2 years. However, screening uptake is sub-optimal: for example rates for the period November 2009 to October 2011 ranged from just 39% for males living in the most deprived areas to 67% for least deprived females. Recent research has shown that asking people to consider the emotional consequences of not participating in screening (anticipated regret) can lead to a significant increase in screening uptake. Methods/Design: We will test a simple anticipated regret manipulation, in a large randomised controlled trial with 60,000 members of the general public. They will be randomly allocated to one of 3 arms, no questionnaire, control questionnaire or anticipated regret questionnaire. The primary outcome will be screening test kit return. Results will also be examined by demographic variables (age, gender, deprivation) as these are currently related to screening kit return. Discussion: If this anticipated regret intervention leads to a significant increase in colorectal cancer screening kit returns, this would represent a rare example of a theoretically-driven, simple intervention that could result in earlier detection of colorectal cancer and many more lives saved. Trial registration: Current Controlled trials: ISRCTN7498645