Abstract
Background and purpose: We have recently demonstrated that screen-detected invasive breast cancers had more favourable tumour characteristics than non-screen-detected. The objective of the study was to analyse differences in breast cancer treatment between screen-detected and non-screen-detected cases by age at diagnosis, with and without adjustment for tumour (T) and nodal (N) status, within a nationwide, population-based mammography screening programme utilising register data.
Material and methods: Data spanning 2008–2017 were collected from the National Quality Register for Breast Cancer. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for treatment disparities between screen-detected and non-screen-detected breast cancer.
Results: Among 46,481 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer aged 40–74 and invited for mammography screening, significant differences in treatment were observed. Screen-detected cases showed higher likelihoods of partial mastectomy compared to mastectomy, endocrine therapy, and radiotherapy, whereas chemotherapy and antibody therapy were less likely compared to non-screen-detected cases. However, when adjusting for surgery type, screen-detected cases showed lower likelihoods of radiotherapy. Age at diagnosis significantly influenced treatment odds ratios, with interactions observed for all treatments except radiotherapy adjusted for surgery. Differences increased with age, except for endocrine therapy. Radiotherapy adjusted for surgery type showed no age-related interaction. Adjusting for T and N did not alter these patterns.
Interpretation: In general, screen-detected cases received less aggressive treatment, such as mastectomy, chemotherapy, and antibody therapy, compared to non-screen-detected cases. Disparities increased with age, except for endocrine therapy and radiotherapy adjusted for surgery. Differences persisted after adjusting for T and N, suggesting that these factors cannot solely explain the results.
Publisher
MJS Publishing, Medical Journals Sweden AB
Reference17 articles.
1. Statistics on new detected cancer cases 2021 (The National Board of Health and Welfare, in Swedish). 2022. [Cited date June 27, 2024] Available from: https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/globalassets/sharepoint-dokument/artikelkatalog/statistik/2022-12-8308.pdf
2. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012;380:1778–1786. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61611-0
3. Nyström L, Rutqvist L, Wall S, Lindgren A, Lindqvist M, Rydén S, et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 1993;341:973–978. https://doi.org/10.1016/0140-6736(93)91067-V
4. European guidelines on breast cancer screening and diagnosis (European Commission). 2023. [Cited date June 27, 2024] Available from: https://healthcare-quality.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ecibc/european-breast-cancer-guidelines
5. Fancellu A, Sanna V, Sedda ML, Delrio D, Cottu P, Spanu A, et al. Benefits of organized mammographic screening programs in women aged 50 to 69 years: A surgical perspective. Clin Breast Cancer. 2019;19:e637–e642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2019.04.013