Comparative pathology of breast cancer in a randomised trial of screening
1991

Breast Cancer Screening Study

Sample size: 23226 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): T.J. Anderson, J. Lamb, P. Donnan, F.E. Alexander, A. Huggins, B.B. Muir, A. E. Kirkpatrick, U. Chetty, W. Hepburn, A. Smith, R.J. Prescott, P. Forrest

Primary Institution: University of Edinburgh

Hypothesis

Does screening for breast cancer lead to earlier detection and better outcomes compared to non-attendance?

Conclusion

Screening for breast cancer leads to the detection of earlier stage cancers and improved survival rates compared to those who do not attend screening.

Supporting Evidence

  • 500 cancers were found in the screening group compared to 340 in the control group.
  • 16% of screen-detected cancers were non-invasive, while 42% were early-stage invasive.
  • 44% of non-attenders had late-stage cancers compared to 36% in controls.
  • Histological characteristics significantly discriminated between cancer types.
  • Screen-detected cancers had better survival rates compared to controls.

Takeaway

This study shows that women who get screened for breast cancer find it earlier, which helps them live longer.

Methodology

The study involved a randomized trial comparing breast cancer outcomes in women invited for screening versus those who were not, with data collected on cancer characteristics and survival.

Potential Biases

Potential bias from the 'cluster' effect of randomization and differences in cancer detection methods.

Limitations

The study may have biases due to the randomization process and differences in follow-up among participants.

Participant Demographics

Women aged 45-64 invited for screening.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.05

Confidence Interval

0.39, 0.74

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication