首页> 外文期刊>Clinical breast cancer >Comparison of clinical-pathologic characteristics and outcomes of true interval and screen-detected invasive breast cancer among participants of a Canadian breast screening program: a nested case-control study.
【24h】

Comparison of clinical-pathologic characteristics and outcomes of true interval and screen-detected invasive breast cancer among participants of a Canadian breast screening program: a nested case-control study.

机译:加拿大乳腺癌筛查计划参与者的临床病理特征和真实间隔与筛查浸润性乳腺癌的结局比较:一项嵌套病例对照研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of interval breast cancers have been limited because of a lack of control for screening interval length and patient age, failure to restrict the interval group to 'true' intervals, and incomplete descriptions of pathology, adjuvant therapies and clinical outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A nested case-control study within the population-based Nova Scotia Breast Screening Program was performed. All true interval cases between 1991 and 2004 were identified, matched 1:2 to screen-detected cases (age, screening interval, time period), and compared in terms of pathologic characteristics and adjuvant therapies via logistic regression. Disease-free and overall survival was estimated, controlling for pathology and adjuvant chemotherapy receipt. RESULTS: A total of 241 true interval invasive cases were matched to 481 screen-detected cases. Interval cases were more likely to be > 1 cm (odds ratio [OR] = 1.76; 95% CI, 1.10-2.83), grade 3 (OR = 2.71; 95% CI, 1.49-4.92), and have lymphovascular invasion (OR = 3.06; 95% CI, 1.85-5.07). Interval cases received more adjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 4.37; 95% CI, 3.03-6.30) and radiation (OR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.02-2.00). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of disease-free and overall survival rates for true intervals and screens were 0.830 (95% CI, 0.770-0.875) versus 0.926 (95% CI, 0.898-0.947) and 0.860 (95% CI, 0.804-0.901) versus 0.937 (95% CI, 0.910-0.956), respectively. CONCLUSION: True interval breast cancers have more adverse prognostic factors compared with screen-detected cases and, despite receiving more adjuvant chemotherapy, are associated with significantly poorer survival outcomes.
机译:背景:由于缺乏对间隔长度和患者年龄的筛查控制,无法将间隔组限制为“真实”间隔,并且对病理学,辅助疗法和临床结果的描述不完整,以前对间隔乳腺癌的分析受到了限制。患者和方法:在基于人群的新斯科舍省乳房筛查计划中进行了一项嵌套的病例对照研究。确定了1991年至2004年之间的所有真实间隔病例,并与筛查发现的病例(年龄,筛查间隔,时间段)按1:2进行匹配,并通过logistic回归对病理特征和辅助疗法进行了比较。估计无病生存期和总生存期,控制了病理学和辅助化疗的接受。结果:总共241例真间隔侵袭病例与481例筛查发现的病例相匹配。间隔病例更可能> 1 cm(优势比[OR] = 1.76; 95%CI,1.10-2.83),3级(OR = 2.71; 95%CI,1.49-4.92),并有淋巴管浸润(OR = 3.06; 95%CI,1.85-5.07)。间隔期患者接受更多辅助化疗(OR = 4.37; 95%CI,3.03-6.30)和放疗(OR = 1.43; 95%CI,1.02-2.00)。真实间隔和筛查的无病生存期和总生存期的5年Kaplan-Meier估计值分别为0.830(95%CI,0.770-0.875)和0.926(95%CI,0.898-0.947)和0.860(95%CI,分别为0.804-0.901)和0.937(95%CI,0.910-0.956)。结论:与筛查发现的病例相比,真间隔期乳腺癌的不良预后因素更多,尽管接受了更多的辅助化疗,但其生存结果明显较差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号