Advanced breast cancer and its prevention by screening.

In discussions on breast cancer screening, much attention has been focussed on the possible morbidity generated by screening. Favourable effects like the prevention of advanced disease seem underestimated, probably because quantification is that difficult. To analyse the amount of care and treatment given to women with advanced breast cancer, we report on patients followed from first recurrence until death using patient files and national sources. A random sample of 60 female cases from computerised registries of two cancer centres and a sample of 20 cases from a non-computerised hospital registry was taken. A total of 68 patient files were sufficiently documented. A woman with advanced breast cancer is estimated to have a 39% loss in utility compared to a healthy woman (range 27-45%). Hormonal treatment is the main modality during 14 and chemotherapy during 4 months. Total medical cost from diagnosis of advanced disease until death amounts to 17,100 US dollars, or 21,000 when including extramural cost. The effect of breast cancer screening by preventing the occurrence of advanced disease is quantified. The resulting gain in quality of life contributes 70% of the total gain in quality of life. In the long run, almost half of the annual cost of screening will be offset by savings in the cost for advanced disease. Only the changes in palliative surgery and/or radiotherapy will be small in contrast to primary treatment changes. Besides the mortality reduction, screening is justified by the improvements in quality of life and cost savings for women prevented from reaching advanced disease

Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: Microsimulation modelling estimates based on observed screen and clinical data

There is a delicate balance between the favourable and unfavourable side-effects of screening in general. Overdiagnosis, the detection of breast cancers by screening that would otherwise never have been clinically diagnosed but are now consequently treated, is such an unfavourable side effect. To correctly model the natural history of breast cancer, one has to estimate mean durations of the different pre-clinical phases, transition probabilities to clinical cancer stages, and sensitivity of the applied test based on observed screen and clinical data. The Dutch data clearly show an increase in screen-detected cases in the 50 to 74 year old age group since the introduction of screening, and a decline in incidence around age 80 years. We had estimated that 3% of total incidence would otherwise not have been diagnosed clinically. This magnitude is no reason not to offer screening for women aged 50 to 74 years. The increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are primarily due to mammography screening, but DCIS still remains a relatively small proportion of the total breast cancer problem

Using observational data to estimate an upper bound on the reduction in cancer mortality due to periodic screening

BACKGROUND: Because randomized cancer screening trials are very expensive, observational cancer screening studies can play an important role in the early phases of screening evaluation. Periodic screening evaluation (PSE) is a methodology for estimating the reduction in population cancer mortality from data on subjects who receive regularly scheduled screens. Although PSE does not require assumptions about natural history of cancer it requires other assumptions, particularly progressive detection – the assumption that once a cancer is detected by a screening test, it will always be detected by the screening test. METHODS: We formulate a simple version of PSE and show that it leads to an upper bound on screening efficacy if the progressive detection assumption does not hold (and any effect of birth cohort is minimal) To determine if the upper bound is reasonable, for three randomized screening trials, we compared PSE estimates based only on screened subjects with PSE estimates based on all subjects. RESULTS: In the three randomized screening trials, PSE estimates based on screened subjects gave fairly close results to PSE estimates based on all subjects. CONCLUSION: PSE has promise for obtaining an upper bound on the reduction in population cancer mortality rates based on observational screening data. If the upper bound estimate is found to be small and any birth cohort effects are likely minimal, then a definitive randomized trial would not be warranted

Preferential risk of HPV16 for squamous cell carcinoma and of HPV18 for adenocarcinoma of the cervix compared to women with normal cytology in The Netherlands

We present the type-distribution of high-risk human papillomavirus (HPV) types in women with normal cytology (n=1467), adenocarcinoma in situ (ACIS) (n=61), adenocarcinoma (n=70), and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (n=83). Cervical adenocarcinoma and ACIS were significantly more frequently associated with HPV18 (ORMH 15.0; 95% CI 8.6–26.1 and 21.8; 95% CI 11.9–39.8, respectively) than normal cytology. Human papillomavirus16 was only associated with adenocarcinoma and ACIS after exclusion of HPV18-positive cases (ORMH 6.6; 95% CI 2.8–16.0 and 9.4; 95% CI 2.8–31.2, respectively). For SCC, HPV16 prevalence was elevated (ORMH 7.0; 95% CI 3.9–12.4) compared to cases with normal cytology, and HPV18 prevalence was only increased after exclusion of HPV16-positive cases (ORMH 4.3; 95% CI 1.6–11.6). These results suggest that HPV18 is mainly a risk factor for the development of adenocarcinoma whereas HPV16 is associated with both SCC and adenocarcinoma