IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0237925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Long term absence of invasive breast cancer diagnosis in 2,402,672 pre and postmenopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Winnifred Cutler
  • James Kolter
  • Catherine Chambliss
  • Heather O’Neill
  • Hugo M Montesinos-Yufa

Abstract

Background: Invasive Breast Cancer (IBC) risk estimates continue to be based on data collated from cancer registries, i.e., retrospective research that excludes disease-free women. For women without a prior diagnosis, these estimates inflate both risk and screening frequency recommendations and inadvertently increase recently recognized harms from overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Objective: To estimate the likelihood that pre or postmenopausal women with no prior diagnosis will remain free of IBC in order to enable evidence-based screening recommendations. Methods: Prospective data from 21 studies of 2,402,672 women were analyzed, updating our previously published systematic search of 19 studies. This second systematic search included PubMed and The Cochrane Library from 2012 through April 2019. Inclusion criteria: only studies reporting the number of women enrolled, length of follow-up, and number of women diagnosed with IBC. Linear regression was used to estimate the percentage of women expected to remain free from an IBC diagnosis based on follow-up duration. To minimize non-response bias and selective outcome bias, only studies reporting outcomes for all enrolled women followed for similar, specific lengths of time were included. Sensitivity analyses confirm that the overall findings were unchanged by age at enrollment, menopausal status, screened women, variation in sample size, duration of follow-up, and heteroskedasticity. Results: The calculated percentage of women remaining IBC-free after follow-ups of 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 years decreases uniformly by about one-fourth of one percent per year, i.e., 0.255% (95% CI: -0.29, -0.22; p

Suggested Citation

  • Winnifred Cutler & James Kolter & Catherine Chambliss & Heather O’Neill & Hugo M Montesinos-Yufa, 2020. "Long term absence of invasive breast cancer diagnosis in 2,402,672 pre and postmenopausal women: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237925
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0237925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237925
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237925&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0237925?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0237925. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.