• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在门诊诊所进行定制化乳腺癌风险评估:识别风险女性的门户。

Customized breast cancer risk assessment in an ambulatory clinic: a portal for identifying women at risk.

机构信息

Comprehensive Breast Health Center, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 May;175(1):229-237. doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-05116-5. Epub 2019 Jan 21.

DOI:10.1007/s10549-018-05116-5
PMID:30666540
Abstract

PURPOSE

Existing high-risk clinic models focus on patients with known risk factors, potentially missing many high-risk patients. Here we describe our experience implementing universal risk assessment in an ambulatory breast center.

METHODS

Since May 2017, all breast center patients completed a customized intake survey addressing known breast cancer risk factors and lifestyle choices. Patient characteristics, family history, risk scores, and lifestyle factors were examined; patients with high-risk breast lesions were excluded. Patients were considered at increased risk by model thresholds Gail 5-year risk > 1.7% (35-59 years), Gail 5-year risk > 5.5% (≥ 60 years), or Tyrer-Cuzick (T-C) v7 lifetime risk > 20% (any age).

RESULTS

From May 2017-April 2018, there were 874 eligible patients-420 (48%) referred for risk assessment (RA) and 454 (52%) for non-specific breast complaints (NSBC). Overall, 389 (45%) were at increased risk of breast cancer. Gail 5-year risks were similar between RA and NSBC patients. However, RA patients more frequently met criteria by T-C score (P = 0.02). Of all patients at increased risk, 149 (39%) were overweight (BMI > 25) or obese (BMI > 30) and only 159 (41%) met recommended exercise standards. NSBC patients who met criteria were more frequently smokers (8% vs 1%, P < 0.01); all other demographic/lifestyle factors were similar among high-risk patients regardless of referral reason.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal risk assessment in a comprehensive breast health center identified 45% of our population to be at increased risk of breast cancer. This clinical care model provides a unique opportunity to identify and address modifiable risk factors among women at risk.

摘要

目的

现有的高风险诊所模式侧重于具有已知风险因素的患者,可能会遗漏许多高风险患者。在此,我们描述了在门诊乳腺中心实施通用风险评估的经验。

方法

自 2017 年 5 月以来,所有乳腺中心患者均完成了一项针对已知乳腺癌风险因素和生活方式选择的定制入组调查。检查了患者特征、家族史、风险评分和生活方式因素;排除了具有高风险乳腺病变的患者。通过模型阈值,将患者定义为具有较高风险:盖尔 5 年风险>1.7%(35-59 岁),盖尔 5 年风险>5.5%(≥60 岁)或 Tyrer-Cuzick(T-C)v7 终生风险>20%(任何年龄)。

结果

2017 年 5 月至 2018 年 4 月,共有 874 名符合条件的患者-420 名(48%)因风险评估(RA)就诊,454 名(52%)因非特定乳腺投诉(NSBC)就诊。总体而言,389 名(45%)患者有较高的乳腺癌风险。RA 和 NSBC 患者的盖尔 5 年风险相似。但是,RA 患者更频繁地符合 T-C 评分标准(P=0.02)。所有处于高风险的患者中,有 149 名(39%)超重(BMI>25)或肥胖(BMI>30),只有 159 名(41%)符合推荐的运动标准。符合标准的 NSBC 患者更频繁地吸烟(8%比 1%,P<0.01);无论转诊原因如何,高风险患者的所有其他人口统计学/生活方式因素都相似。

结论

在综合性乳腺保健中心进行通用风险评估发现,我们人群中有 45%的人有较高的乳腺癌风险。这种临床护理模式为识别和解决高危女性的可改变风险因素提供了独特的机会。

相似文献

1
Customized breast cancer risk assessment in an ambulatory clinic: a portal for identifying women at risk.在门诊诊所进行定制化乳腺癌风险评估:识别风险女性的门户。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019 May;175(1):229-237. doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-05116-5. Epub 2019 Jan 21.
2
Assessing Breast Cancer Risk Estimates Based on the Gail Model and Its Predictors in Qatari Women.基于盖尔模型及其预测因素评估卡塔尔女性的乳腺癌风险估计
J Prim Care Community Health. 2017 Jul;8(3):180-187. doi: 10.1177/2150131917696941. Epub 2017 Mar 18.
3
Variation in Breast Cancer Risk Model Estimates Among Women in Their 40s Seen in Primary Care.在初级保健中观察到的40多岁女性乳腺癌风险模型估计值的差异。
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2022 Apr;31(4):495-502. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2021.0299. Epub 2022 Jan 21.
4
Limitations of the Gail model in the specialized breast cancer risk assessment clinic.盖尔模型在专业乳腺癌风险评估诊所中的局限性。
Breast J. 2002 Jan-Feb;8(1):23-7. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-4741.2002.08005.x.
5
Use of Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve Analysis for Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail in Breast Cancer Screening in Jiangxi Province, China.应用受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线分析 Tyrer-Cuzick 和 Gail 在江西省乳腺癌筛查中的应用。
Med Sci Monit. 2018 Aug 9;24:5528-5532. doi: 10.12659/MSM.910108.
6
Differences and similarities in breast cancer risk assessment models in clinical practice: which model to choose?临床实践中乳腺癌风险评估模型的异同:该选择哪种模型?
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 May;115(2):381-90. doi: 10.1007/s10549-008-0070-x. Epub 2008 May 30.
7
Assessment of the Gail Model in Estimating the Risk of Breast Cancer: Effect of Cancer Worry and Risk in Healthy Women.评估盖尔模型在估计乳腺癌风险中的作用:癌症担忧和健康女性风险的影响
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2019 Jun 1;20(6):1765-1771. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2019.20.6.1765.
8
Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme.家族病史评估与筛查项目中乳腺癌风险评估套餐的评估
J Med Genet. 2003 Nov;40(11):807-14. doi: 10.1136/jmg.40.11.807.
9
Comparison of Questionnaire-Based Breast Cancer Prediction Models in the Nurses' Health Study.基于问卷调查的乳腺癌预测模型在护士健康研究中的比较。
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2019 Jul;28(7):1187-1194. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-18-1039. Epub 2019 Apr 23.
10
An integrated breast cancer risk assessment and management model based on fuzzy cognitive maps.基于模糊认知图的乳腺癌风险评估与管理综合模型。
Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2015 Mar;118(3):280-97. doi: 10.1016/j.cmpb.2015.01.001. Epub 2015 Jan 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Causative Genes of Homologous Recombination Deficiency (HRD)-Related Breast Cancer and Specific Strategies at Present.同源重组缺陷(HRD)相关乳腺癌的致病基因及目前的特异性策略
Curr Oncol. 2025 Feb 6;32(2):90. doi: 10.3390/curroncol32020090.
2
Defining the Need for Services for Patients at High Risk of Breast Cancer at a Safety-Net Hospital: An Approach to Narrowing the Disparities Gap.定义安全网医院中高乳腺癌风险患者服务需求:缩小差距的方法。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2024 Oct;31(11):7570-7581. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15789-6. Epub 2024 Aug 13.
3
Factors influencing U.S. women's interest and preferences for breast cancer risk communication: a cross-sectional study from a large tertiary care breast imaging center.
影响美国女性对乳腺癌风险沟通兴趣和偏好的因素:来自大型三级护理乳腺成像中心的横断面研究。
BMC Womens Health. 2024 Jun 21;24(1):359. doi: 10.1186/s12905-024-03197-7.
4
Spectral Flow Cytometry Methods and Pipelines for Comprehensive Immunoprofiling of Human Peripheral Blood and Bone Marrow.光谱流式细胞术方法及流程在人类外周血和骨髓全面免疫组化分析中的应用
Cancer Res Commun. 2024 Mar 25;4(3):895-910. doi: 10.1158/2767-9764.CRC-23-0357.
5
Inequities in referrals to a breast cancer risk assessment and prevention clinic: a mixed methods study.不平等转诊至乳腺癌风险评估和预防诊所:一项混合方法研究。
BMC Prim Care. 2023 Aug 25;24(1):165. doi: 10.1186/s12875-023-02126-1.
6
Initiation and tolerance of chemoprevention among women with high-risk breast lesions: the potential of low-dose tamoxifen.高危乳腺病变女性的化学预防起始和耐受:低剂量他莫昔芬的潜力。
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2022 Jun;193(2):417-427. doi: 10.1007/s10549-022-06577-5. Epub 2022 Apr 4.
7
Breast cancer risk based on adapted IBIS prediction model in Slovenian women aged 40-49 years - could it be better?基于 IBIS 预测模型的斯洛文尼亚 40-49 岁女性乳腺癌风险 - 能否更好?
Radiol Oncol. 2020 Jul 2;54(3):335-340. doi: 10.2478/raon-2020-0040.
8
An Expanded Agenda for the Primary Prevention of Breast Cancer: Charting a Course for the Future.扩大乳腺癌初级预防议程:为未来规划路线。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jan 22;17(3):714. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17030714.