DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Successful First Round Results of a Turkish Breast Cancer Screening Program with Mammography in Bahcesehir, Istanbul

  • Kayhan, Arda (Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine, Namik Kemal University) ;
  • Gurdal, Sibel Ozkan (Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Namik Kemal University) ;
  • Ozaydin, Nilufer (Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine Marmara University) ;
  • Cabioglu, Neslihan (Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University) ;
  • Ozturk, Enis (Department of Radiology, Research Hospital) ;
  • Ozcinar, Beyza (Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University) ;
  • Aribal, Erkin (Department of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Marmara University) ;
  • Ozmen, Vahit (Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University)
  • Published : 2014.02.28

Abstract

Background: The Bahcesehir Breast Cancer Screening Project is the first organized population based breast cancer mammographic screening project in Turkey. The objective of this prospective observational study was to demonstrate the feasibility of a screening program in a developing country and to determine the appropriate age (40 or 50 years old) to start with screening in Turkish women. Materials and Methods: Between January 2009 to December 2010, a total of 3,758 women aged 40-69 years were recruited in this prospective study. Screening was conducted biannually, and five rounds were planned. After clinical breast examination (CBE), two-view mammograms were obtained. True positivity, false positivity, positive predictive values (PPV) according to ACR, cancer detection rate, minimal cancer detection rate, axillary node positivity and recall rate were calculated. Breast ultrasound and biopsy were performed in suspicious cases. Results: Breast biopsy was performed in 55 patients, and 18 cancers were detected in the first round. The overall cancer detection rate was 4.8 per 1,000 women. Most of the screened women (54%) and detected cancers (56%) were in women aged 40-49. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and stage I cancer and axillary node positivity rates were 22%, 61%, and 16.6%, respectively. The positive predictivity for biopsy was 32.7%, whereas the overall recall rate was 18.4 %. Conclusions: Preliminary results of the study suggest that population based organized screening are feasible and age of onset of mammographic screening should be 40 years in Turkey.

Keywords

Breast cancer;mammography screening;detection rate;age;Turkish women

References

  1. US Preventive Services Task Force (2009). Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. PreventiveServices Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med, 151, 716-26. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-10-200911170-00008
  2. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, et al (1985). Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: randomised trial from the Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet, 1, 829-32.
  3. UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group (1988). First results on mortalityreduction in the UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group. Lancet, 2, 411-6.
  4. US Preventive Services Task Force (2002). Screening for Breast Cancer: Recommendations and Rationale. Ann Intern Med, 137, 344-6. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-137-5_Part_1-200209030-00011
  5. Woolf SH (2010). The 2009 breast cancer screening recommendations of the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama, 303, 162-3. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.1989
  6. Ozmen V, Anderson BO (2008). The challenge of breast cancer in low and middle income countries implementing the Breast Health Global Initiative Guidelines. Asia Pac Oncol and Haematol, 1, 31-4.
  7. Olivotto IA, Kan L, d'Yachkova Y, et al (2000). Ten years of breast screening in the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia, 1988-97. J Med Screen, 7, 152-9. https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.7.3.152
  8. Ozmen V (2008). Breast cancer in the world and Turkey. J Breast Hlth, 4, 7-12.
  9. Ozmen V (2012). Turkiye'de Meme Kanseri, Turkiye Meme Hastaliklari Federasyonu, Ulusal Meme Kanseri Veri Tabani Verilerinin Analizi. 2012, Istanbul.
  10. Ozmen V, Ozaydin AN, Cabioglu N, et al (2011). Survey on pilot mammographic screening program in Istanbul, Turkey. Breast J, 17, 260-7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2011.01065.x
  11. Perry N, Broeders M, deWolf C, Tornberg S (2001). European guidelines for quality assurance in mammography screening. 3rd ed. Luxembourg: European Commission.
  12. RSHMB (2004). www.tusak.saglik.gov.tr/pdf 2004.
  13. Reston VA (2003). Illustrated breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). In:American College of Radiology (ACR), 4th edn 2003:234.
  14. Schopper D, de Wolf, C (2009). How effective are breast cancer screening programmes by mammography? Review of the current evidence. Eur J Cancer, 45, 1916-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2009.03.022
  15. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE (2002). Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology, 224, 861-9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2243011482
  16. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (www.seer.cancer.gov): SEER* Stat Database: Incidence- SEER 9 Regs Public Use, Nov 2005 Sub (1973-2003), National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch.
  17. Joensuu H, Lehtimaki T, Holli K, et al (2004). Risk for distant recurrence of breast cancerdetected by mammography screening or other methods. JAMA, 292, 1064-73. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.292.9.1064
  18. Gnerlich JL, Deshpande AD, Jeffe DB, et al (2009). Elevated breast cancer mortality in women younger than age 40 years compared with older women is attributed to poorer survival in early-stage disease. J Am Coll Surg, 208, 341-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.12.001
  19. Groenendijk RP, Bult P, Tewarie L, et al (2000). Screen- detected breast cancers have a lower mitotic activity index. Br J Cancer, 82, 381-4. https://doi.org/10.1054/bjoc.1999.0930
  20. Harris R, Yeatts J, Kinsinger L (2011). Breast cancer screening for women ages 50 to 69 years a systematic review of observational evidence. Prev Med, 53, 108-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.07.004
  21. Larsson LG, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, et al (1997). Updated overview of the Swedish randomized trials on breast cancer screening with mammography: age group 40-49 at randomization. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 22, 57-61.
  22. Liston J, Wilson R (2005). Quality assurance guidelines for breast cancer screeningradiology. NHS Breast Screening Programmes publication no. 59. Sheffield, England:NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, January 2005.
  23. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, et al (2006). Trial Management Group. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancermortality at 10 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 368, 2053-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69834-6
  24. Nystrom L, Rutqvist L, Wall S, et al (1993). Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet, 341, 973-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(93)91067-V
  25. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, et al (2002). Long-term effects of mammography screening: upated overview of the Swedish randomized trials. Lancet, 359, 909-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08020-0
  26. Bassett LW, Hendrick RE, Bassford TL (1994). Quality determinants of mammography. In: Clinical practice guideline no. 13: AHCPR publication no. 95-0632. Rockville, Md: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
  27. Anderson BO, Distelhorst SR (2008). Guidelines for international breast health and cancer-control implementation. Introduction. Cancer, 15, 2215-6.
  28. Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, et al (1988). Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening- trial. BMJ, 297, 943-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.297.6654.943
  29. Andersson I, Janzon L (1997). Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50:updated results from the Malmo Mammographic Screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr, 22, 63-7.
  30. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA (2003). Association of volume and volume independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst, 95, 282-90. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/95.4.282
  31. Bjurstam N, Bjorneld L, Warwick J, et al (2003). The gothenburg breast cancer screening trial. Cancer, 97, 2387-96. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11361
  32. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, et al (2010). Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer, 10, 1002.
  33. Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellstrom L, et al (1991). Randomisedstudy of mammographic screening: preliminary report on mortality in the Stockholmtrial. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 18, 49-56. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01975443
  34. Gilliland FD, Joste N, Stauber PM, et al (2000). Biologic characteristics of interval and screen-detected breast cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst, 92, 743-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.9.743
  35. Glasziou P, Houssami N (2011). The evidence base for breast cancer screening. Prev Med, 53, 100-2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.05.011
  36. Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK, et al (1999). 14 years of follow-up from the Edinburgh randomized trial of breast cancer screening. Lancet, 353, 1903-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(98)07413-3
  37. Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Krapcho M, et al (2007). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2007, National Cancer Institude. Bethesda, MD.

Cited by

  1. Prognostic Factors for Survival in Patients with Breast Cancer Referred to Omitted Cancer Research Center in Iran vol.16, pp.12, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.12.5081
  2. Health Beliefs of Nursing Faculty Students about Breast Cancer and Self Breast Examination vol.16, pp.17, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.17.7731
  3. Mammographic density assessed on paired raw and processed digital images and on paired screen-film and digital images across three mammography systems vol.18, pp.1, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-016-0787-0