Journals / Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology / 2016 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 6

Radiologic findings of screen-detected cancers in an organized population-based screening mammography program in Turkey

Pages
508–513
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We believe that this study will pioneer implementation of efficient population-based mammographic screenings in devel-oping countries

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:PURPOSE Bahçeşehir Breast Cancer Screening Program is a population based organized screening pro-gram in Turkey, where asymptomatic women aged 40-69 years are screened biannually.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS A total of 6912 women were screened in three rounds.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We believe that this study will pioneer implementation of efficient population-based mammographic screenings in devel-oping countries
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

PURPOSE Bahçeşehir Breast Cancer Screening Program is a population based organized screening pro-gram in Turkey, where asymptomatic women aged 40-69 years are screened biannually. In this prospective study, we aimed to determine the mammographic findings of screen-detected can-cers and discuss the efficacy of breast cancer screening in a developing country. METHODS A total of 6912 women were screened in three rounds. The radiologic findings were grouped as mass, focal asymmetry, calcification, and architectural distortion. Masses were classified accord-ing to shape, border, and density. Calcifications were grouped according to morphology and distribution. Cancers were grouped according to the clinical stage. RESULTSSeventy cancers were detected with an incidence of 4.8/1000. Two cancers were detected in oth-er centers and three were not visualized mammographically. Mammographic presentations of the remaining 65 cancers were mass (47.7%, n=31), calcification (30.8%, n=20), focal asymmetry (16.9%, n=11), architectural distortion (3.1%, n=2), and skin thickening (1.5%, n=1). The numbers of stage 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4 cancers were 13 (20.0%), 34 (52.3%), 14 (21.5%), 3 (4.6%), and 1 (1.5%), re-spectively. The numbers of interval and missed cancers were 5 (7.4%) and 7 (10.3%), respectively. CONCLUSION A high incidence of early breast cancer has been detected. The incidence of missed and interval cancers did not show major differences from western screening trials. We believe that this study will pioneer implementation of efficient population-based mammographic screenings in devel-oping countries

🔖

Cite This Article

KAYHAN, A., ARIBAL, M. E., ŞAHİN, C., TAŞÇI, Ö. C., GÜRDAL, S. Ö., ÖZTÜRK, E., HATİPOĞLU, H. H., ÖZAYDIN, A. N., CABIOĞLU, N., ÖZÇINAR, B., ÖZMEN, V. (2016). Radiologic findings of screen-detected cancers in an organized population-based screening mammography program in Turkey. Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 6, 508–513. https://ajindex.com/articles/350044

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: Globocan 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127:2893-2917. [CrossRef] Igene H. Global health inequalities and breast cancer: an impending public health prob- lem for developing countries. Breast J 2008; 14:428-434. [CrossRef] Porter P. "Westernizing" women's risks? Breast cancer in lower-income countries. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:213-216. [CrossRef] TC. Halk Sağlığı Kurumu Türkiye Kanser İstatistikleri, Ankara, 2015; 20. Available at: http:/kanser.gov.tr/Dosya/ca_istatistik/ANA_ rapor_2012v02.pdf.Accessed 2015; 20. Association of Breast Surgery at Baso. Surgical guidelines for the management of breast can- cer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2009; 35:1-22. [CrossRef] Betts GL, Kessels AG, Rupa JD, Bosch AM, Koster D. Preoperative estimation of the pathological breast tumour size by physical examination, mammography and ultrasound: a prospective study on 105 invasive tumours. Eur J Radiol 2003; 48:285-292. [CrossRef] Dummin LJ, Cox M, Plant L. Prediction of breast tumor size by mammography and sonography - A breast screen experience. Breast 2007; 16:38-46. [CrossRef] Tabar L, Tony Chen HH, Amy Yen MF, et al. Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14-mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101:1745-1759. [CrossRef] Tabar L, Dean PB. Teaching atlas of mammography. Thieme. Stuttgart: Germany. 3rd edition, 2001.
  2. Ikeda BM, Andersson I, Wattsgård C, Janzon L, Linell F. Interval carcinomas in the Malmö mam- mographic screening trial: radiographic appear- ance and prognostic considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992; 159:287-294. [CrossRef] Frisell J, Rosen Avon, Wiege M, Nilsson B, Goldman S. Interval cancer and survival in a randomized breast cancer screening trial in Stockholm. Breast Cancer Treat Res 1992; 24:11-16. [CrossRef] Burrell HC, Sibbering DM, Wilson AR, et al. Screening interval cancers: mammographic features and prognostic factors. Radiology 1996; 199:811-817. [CrossRef] Kavanagh AM, Mitchell H, Giles GG. Hormone re- placement therapy and accuracy of mammograph- ic screening. Lancet 2000; 355:270-274. [CrossRef] Sala E, Warren R, McCann J, Duffy S, Day N, Lu- ben R. Mammographic parenchymal patterns and mode of detection: implications for the breast screening programme. J Med Screen 1998; 5:207-212. [CrossRef] Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone