Reason for Late-Stage Breast Cancer: Absence of Screening or Detection, or Breakdown in Follow-up?
Open Access
- 19 October 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 96 (20) , 1518-1527
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djh284
Abstract
Background: Mammography screening increases the detection of early-stage breast cancers. Therefore, implementing screening should reduce the percentage of women who are diagnosed with late-stage disease. However, despite high national mammography screening rates, late-stage breast cancers still occur, possibly because of failures in screening implementation. Methods: Using data from seven health care plans that included 1.5 million women aged 50 years or older, we conducted retrospective reviews of chart and automated data for 3 years before 1995–1999 diagnoses of late-stage (metastatic and/or tumor size ≥3 cm; case subjects, n = 1347) and early-stage breast cancers (control subjects, n = 1347). We categorized the earliest screening mammogram during the period 13–36 months before diagnosis as none (absence of screening), negative (absence of detection), or positive (potential breakdown in follow-up). We compared the proportion of case and control subjects in each category of screening implementation and estimated the likelihood (odds ratio [OR] with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) of late-stage breast cancer. We also evaluated demographic characteristics associated with absence of screening in women with late-stage disease. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Absence of screening, absence of detection, and potential breakdown in follow-up were distributed differently among case (52.1%, 39.5%, and 8.4%, respectively) and control subjects (34.4%, 56.9%, and 8.8%, respectively) ( P = .03). Among all women, the odds of having late-stage cancer were higher among women with an absence of screening (OR = 2.17, 95% CI = 1.84 to 2.56; P <.001). Among case patients, women were more likely to be in the absence-of-screening group if they were aged 75 years or older (OR = 2.77, 95% CI = 2.10 to 3.65), unmarried (OR = 1.78, 95% CI = 1.41 to 2.24), or without a family history of breast cancer (OR = 1.84, 95% CI = 1.45 to 2.34). A higher proportion of women from census blocks with less education (58.5% versus 49.4%; P = .003) or lower median annual income (54.4% versus 42.9%; P = .004) were in the absence-of-screening category compared with the proportion for the other two categories combined. Conclusions: To reduce late-stage breast cancer occurrence, reaching unscreened women, including elderly, unmarried, low-income, and less educated women, should be made a top priority for screening implementation.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Processes of care in cervical and breast cancer screening and follow-up—the importance of communicationPreventive Medicine, 2004
- Mammography screening matters for young women with breast carcinomaCancer, 2003
- American College of Radiology Imaging NetworkAcademic Radiology, 2002
- Screening HMO Women Overdue for both Mammograms and Pap TestsPreventive Medicine, 2002
- Socio-demographic factors, health behavior and late-stage diagnosis of breast cancer in Germany: A population-based studyJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2001
- THE SWEDISH TWO-COUNTY TRIAL TWENTY YEARS LATERRadiologic Clinics of North America, 2000
- Screening Mammography and Late-Stage Breast Cancer: A Population-Based StudyPreventive Medicine, 1999
- Epidemiologic Approach for Cancer ScreeningJournal of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, 1992
- Using Mammography for Cancer Control: An Unrealized PotentialCA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 1987
- The effect of mass screening in iceland, 1965–74, on the incidence and mortality of cervical carcinomaInternational Journal of Cancer, 1978