Shen Yu, Yang Ying, Inoue Lurdes Y T, Munsell Mark F, Miller Anthony B, Berry Donald A
Department of Biostatistics and Applied Mathematics, The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd., Houston, TX 77030, USA.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005 Aug 17;97(16):1195-203. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dji239.
Screening mammography detects breast cancers earlier than those detected symptomatically, and so mammographically detected breast cancers tend to have better prognoses. The so-called stage shift that results from screen detection is subject to lead-time and length biases, and so earlier detection may not translate into longer survival. We used data from three large breast cancer screening trials--Health Insurance Plan (HIP) of New York and two Canadian National Breast Cancer Screening Studies (CNBSS)--to investigate survival benefits of breast cancer screening beyond stage shift. We also address whether method of detection is an independent prognostic factor in breast cancer.
The HIP trial randomly assigned approximately 62,000 women to screening and control groups. The two CNBSS trial cohorts CNBSS-1 and CNBSS-2 included a total of 44,970 women in the screening group and 44,961 in the control group. After adjusting for stage and other tumor characteristics in a Cox proportional hazards model, survival distributions were compared by method of breast cancer detection with both univariate and multivariable analyses. All P values are two-sided.
Breast cancers detected by screening mammography had a shift in stage distribution to earlier stages (for HIP, P < .001; for CNBSS-1, P = .03; and for CNBSS-2, P < .001). After adjusting for tumor size, lymph node status, and disease stage in a Cox proportional hazards model, method of detection was a statistically significant independent predictor of disease-specific survival. Patients with interval cancers had a 53% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 17% to 100%) greater hazard of death from breast cancer than patients with screen-detected cancers, and patients with cancer in the control groups had a 36% (95% CI = 10% to 68%) greater hazard of death than patients with screen-detected cancer.
There was an apparent survival benefit beyond stage shift for patients with screen-detected breast cancers compared with patients with breast cancers detected otherwise. Method of detection appears to be an important prognostic factor, even after adjusting for known tumor characteristics. This finding suggests that clinical trialists should routinely collect information about method of detection.
乳腺钼靶筛查比有症状时发现乳腺癌更早,因此通过钼靶筛查发现的乳腺癌往往预后更好。筛查检测导致的所谓分期变化存在领先时间和长度偏倚,所以早期发现不一定能转化为更长的生存期。我们使用来自三项大型乳腺癌筛查试验的数据——纽约健康保险计划(HIP)以及两项加拿大国家乳腺癌筛查研究(CNBSS)——来研究乳腺癌筛查在分期变化之外的生存获益。我们还探讨了检测方法是否为乳腺癌的独立预后因素。
HIP试验将约62000名女性随机分为筛查组和对照组。两项CNBSS试验队列CNBSS - 1和CNBSS - 2的筛查组共有44970名女性,对照组有44961名女性。在Cox比例风险模型中对分期和其他肿瘤特征进行调整后,通过乳腺癌检测方法,采用单变量和多变量分析比较生存分布。所有P值均为双侧。
通过乳腺钼靶筛查发现的乳腺癌分期分布向早期转移(HIP试验中,P <.001;CNBSS - 1试验中,P =.03;CNBSS - 2试验中,P <.001)。在Cox比例风险模型中对肿瘤大小、淋巴结状态和疾病分期进行调整后,检测方法是疾病特异性生存的统计学显著独立预测因素。间期癌患者死于乳腺癌的风险比筛查发现的癌症患者高53%(95%置信区间[CI] = 17%至100%),对照组癌症患者死于乳腺癌的风险比筛查发现的癌症患者高36%(95%CI = 10%至68%)。
与其他方式发现的乳腺癌患者相比,筛查发现的乳腺癌患者在分期变化之外有明显的生存获益。即使在对已知肿瘤特征进行调整后,检测方法似乎仍是一个重要的预后因素。这一发现表明临床试验人员应常规收集有关检测方法的信息。