Breast Tumor Characteristics as Predictors of Mammographic Detection: Comparison of Interval- and Screen-Detected Cancers
Open Access
- 1 December 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 91 (23), 2020-2028
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/91.23.2020
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although mammographic screening is useful for detecting early breast cancer, some tumors are detected in the interval between screening examinations. This study attempted to characterize fully the tumors detected in the two different manners. METHODS: Our study utilized a case-control design and involved a cohort of women undergoing mammographic screening within the defined population of a health maintenance organization (the Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound). Women were classified as having “interval” or “ interval-detected” cancers (n = 150) if their diagnosis was made within 24 months after a negative-screening mammogram or one that indicated a benign condition. Cancers were classified as “screen detected” (n = 279) if the diagnosis occurred after a positive assessment by screening mammography. Tumors from women in each group were evaluated for clinical presentation, histology, proliferative characteristics, and expression of hormone receptors, p53 tumor suppressor protein, and c-erbB-2 protein. RESULTS: Interval-detected cancers occurred more in younger women and were of larger tumor size than screen-detected cancers. In unconditional logistic regression models adjusted for age and tumor size, tumors with lobular (odds ratio [OR] = 1.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.9-4.2) or mucinous (OR = 5.5; 95% CI = 1.5-19.4) histology, high proliferation (by either mitotic count [OR = 2.9; 95% CI = 1.5-5.7] or Ki-67 antigen expression [OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.3-4.1]), high histologic grade (OR = 2.1; 95% CI = 1.2-4.0), high nuclear grade (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.0-3.7), or negative estrogen receptor status (OR = 1.8; 95% CI = 1.0-3.1) were more likely to surface in the interval between screening examinations. Tumors with tubular histology (OR = 0.2; 95% CI = 0.0-0.8) or with a high percentage of in situ components (50%) (OR = 0.5; 95% CI = 0.2-1.2) were associated with an increased likelihood of screen detection. CONCLUSIONS: Our data from a large group of women in a defined population indicate that screening mammography may miss tumors of lobular or mucinous histology and some rapidly proliferating, high-grade tumors.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mammographic breast density and risk of breast cancer: masking bias or causality?European Journal of Epidemiology, 1998
- Case-Control Study of Factors Associated With Failure to Detect Breast Cancer by MammographyJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1992
- Invasives lobuläres Mammakarzinom. Mammographische DarstellungRöFo - Fortschritte auf dem Gebiet der Röntgenstrahlen und der bildgebenden Verfahren, 1990
- Analysis of interval breast carcinomas in a randomized screening trial in StockholmBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 1987
- The association of pathologic and mammographic characteristics of primary human breast cancers with “slow” and “fast” growth rates and with axillary lymph node metastasesCancer, 1984
- Mammographically occult breast cancer: A pathologic and radiologic studyCancer, 1983
- So-called interval cancers of the breast: Pathologic and radiologic analysis of sixty-four casesCancer, 1982
- Growth rate of 147 mammary carcinomasCancer, 1980
- Breast cancer missed by mammographyAmerican Journal of Roentgenology, 1979
- Relation between mammary cancer growth kinetics and the intervals between screeningsCancer, 1979