|
 In areas of the U.S. with high levels of screening, more tumors were
diagnosed - but breast cancer death rates were no lower than in
areas with fewer screenings, researchers report.
"The mortality results that we observed are far from definitive,"
cautioned Charles Harding, the study's lead author from Seattle,
Washington.
"The most dramatic finding of our study is the immediately evident -
and substantial - evidence of breast cancer overdiagnosis," he told
Reuters Health in an email.
Each year, about 230,000 U.S. women are newly diagnosed with breast
cancer, according to the National Cancer Institute.
While screening guidelines vary, the government-backed U.S.
Preventive Services Task Force says average-risk women should have
mammograms every other year between ages 50 and 74. Getting screened
before age 50 should be an individual decision, according to the
Task Force.
For the new study, researchers analyzed breast cancer screenings,
cancer diagnoses, tumor characteristics and deaths in 547 U.S.
counties.
The data came from nearly 16 million women living in those counties
in 2000. All were at least 40 years old. The percentage who had
screening mammograms ranged from 39 percent to 78 percent, depending
on where they lived.
Overall, more than 53,000 of the women were diagnosed with breast
cancer in 2000.
The researchers report in JAMA Internal Medicine that the number of
breast cancer diagnoses rose with the number of screenings, but the
amount of breast cancer deaths over the next 10 years remained the
same.
Overall, a 10 percentage point increase in breast cancer screenings
was tied to a 16 percent increase in breast cancer diagnoses.
The number of screening mammograms performed did not affect the
number of breast cancer deaths, however.
Most of the additional cancers detected on screening were small
tumors. There wasn't an increase in diagnosis of large - and
presumably more advanced - tumors.
The findings suggest breast cancer screenings lead to overdiagnosis
because they mainly catch smaller tumors, the researchers say.
[to top of second column] |
"We were troubled that we did not see evidence of a mortality
benefit from screening, especially because there was no relationship
between screening and advanced-stage cancer, either," Harding said.
"However, our findings are quite tentative for mortality because the
data are very noisy," he added. "We feel that our study raises
important questions about the benefits of mammography screening, but
it certainly does not answer them."
More research is needed, he said.
The researchers also warn in their paper that their findings may be
limited by so-called ecological bias, which can occur when
assumptions are made about individuals from data of a large group.
Dr. Joann Elmore and Ruth Etzioni of the University of Washington in
Seattle agree in an editorial that the study's results are limited
by the potential of ecological bias.
For example, there is no way to know if the women who received the
mammograms were the same women who went on to be diagnosed with the
disease, they write.
Also, Elmore and Etzioni caution, other unmeasured factors may
account for the lack of difference in breast cancer deaths.
"Prior ecological studies of mammography conducted at the larger
state level with a wider range of mammography frequencies showed a
decline in breast cancer mortality associated with more screening,"
Elmore and Etzioni added.
SOURCE: http://bit.ly/1IZB2nH and http://bit.ly/1KISFwu JAMA
Internal Medicine, online July 6, 2015.
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
