Forum for Science, Industry and Business

Sponsored by:     3M 
Search our Site:

 

Breast cancer screens scrutinised

19.10.2001


Mammography screening may not stand up to scrutiny.
© SPL


Study questions whether mammography saves lives.

Breast-cancer screening programmes may not save lives, according to a new examination of clinical trials. The controversial findings have led to calls for a re-evaluation of the routine monitoring procedure undergone by numerous women.

Mammography, X-ray breast imaging, is used in Europe and the United States to catch cancers early. "We’ve based a national screening programme on a set of results which do not stand up to scrutiny," says Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, the medical journal that today publishes the peer-reviewed research.



In January 2000, Ole Olsen and Peter Gotzsche of the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen, Denmark first questioned whether regular screening of middle-aged women reduces the overall cancer death rate1. Their challenging re-analysis of large-scale mammography trials sparked public and medical controversy as some questioned the validity of the work.

Now Olsen and Gotzsche have confirmed their earlier conclusions with a more comprehensive analysis2,3. The report comes with further scientific backing from the respected Cochrane Collaboration, an independent, international body that supports high-quality, systematic reviews of health-care treatments. "The best evidence says there is no reduction in mortality following screening," says Olsen.

Horton thinks that the "storm of protest" triggered by the initial report was understandable but subjective. "Everyone wants screening mammography to be a great success," he says. We should not be afraid to put medical procedures under the same scrutiny as any political decision, he argues.

"There is an urgency for the data to be re-analysed correctly," says breast-cancer clinician Serge Rozenberg of the Free University of Brussels in Belgium, and for women to be informed of existing doubts over the efficacy of screening. "This is about millions of women," he says; not acting on this study is "unacceptable".

But some still dispute Olsen and Gotzsche’s techniques and findings. "We estimate that screening is saving on average 1,250 lives a year," says Julietta Patnick, National Coordinator of the UK’s National Health Service breast-screening programme, which aims to examine all women over 50 every 3 years.

A bumpy ride

Around 1 in 8 women in the United States and 1 in 11 in Britain will develop breast cancer during their lives. It is the main cause of female cancer deaths in these countries for women under 54.

Mammography detects small changes in breast tissue that may indicate the beginnings of a tumour; results influence how doctors proceed. Treatment usually involves surgery to remove the abnormal tissue or the whole breast, followed by radiotherapy, chemotherapy or hormone therapy.

Olsen and Gotzsche reviewed seven clinical trials carried out since the 1960s in Europe, the United States and Canada, involving half-a-million women. The studies reported an average 30% reduction in mortality.

But the pair report that several studies were flawed, for example because women were not properly assigned at random to groups with or without screening. In the two best trials, Olsen and Gotzsche conclude that screening produced no reduction in overall death rate.

They calculate that in some trials, lives lost for other reasons outweighed the reduction in deaths due to breast cancer. Deaths in a screened group may be less likely to be ascribed to breast cancer, speculates Olsen - deaths may be "relabelled", he says.

Screened women were also more likely to undergo aggressive treatment. Some of this may have been unnecessary, say the authors - some tissue changes are benign or slow-growing and would not put lives at risk. Treatment also creates its own problems - for example, radiotherapy leads to an increased chance of heart disease.

References
  1. Gotzsche, P.C. & Olsen, O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable?. The Lancet, 355, 129 - 134, (2000).

  2. Olsen, O. & Gotzsche, P.C. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. The Lancet, 358, 1340 - 1342 , (2001).

  3. Olsen, O. & Gotzsche, P.C.Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Library, issue 4, Oxford: Update Software, in press (2001).

HELEN PEARSON | Nature News Service
Further information:
http://www.nature.com/nsu/011025/011025-5.html
http://www.nature.com/nsu/

More articles from Health and Medicine:

nachricht World first: Massive thrombosis removed during early pregnancy
20.07.2017 | Universitätsspital Bern

nachricht Therapy of preterm birth in sight?
19.07.2017 | Universitätsspital Bern

All articles from Health and Medicine >>>

The most recent press releases about innovation >>>

Die letzten 5 Focus-News des innovations-reports im Überblick:

Im Focus: Manipulating Electron Spins Without Loss of Information

Physicists have developed a new technique that uses electrical voltages to control the electron spin on a chip. The newly-developed method provides protection from spin decay, meaning that the contained information can be maintained and transmitted over comparatively large distances, as has been demonstrated by a team from the University of Basel’s Department of Physics and the Swiss Nanoscience Institute. The results have been published in Physical Review X.

For several years, researchers have been trying to use the spin of an electron to store and transmit information. The spin of each electron is always coupled...

Im Focus: The proton precisely weighted

What is the mass of a proton? Scientists from Germany and Japan successfully did an important step towards the most exact knowledge of this fundamental constant. By means of precision measurements on a single proton, they could improve the precision by a factor of three and also correct the existing value.

To determine the mass of a single proton still more accurate – a group of physicists led by Klaus Blaum and Sven Sturm of the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear...

Im Focus: On the way to a biological alternative

A bacterial enzyme enables reactions that open up alternatives to key industrial chemical processes

The research team of Prof. Dr. Oliver Einsle at the University of Freiburg's Institute of Biochemistry has long been exploring the functioning of nitrogenase....

Im Focus: The 1 trillion tonne iceberg

Larsen C Ice Shelf rift finally breaks through

A one trillion tonne iceberg - one of the biggest ever recorded -- has calved away from the Larsen C Ice Shelf in Antarctica, after a rift in the ice,...

Im Focus: Laser-cooled ions contribute to better understanding of friction

Physics supports biology: Researchers from PTB have developed a model system to investigate friction phenomena with atomic precision

Friction: what you want from car brakes, otherwise rather a nuisance. In any case, it is useful to know as precisely as possible how friction phenomena arise –...

All Focus news of the innovation-report >>>

Anzeige

Anzeige

Event News

Closing the Sustainability Circle: Protection of Food with Biobased Materials

21.07.2017 | Event News

»We are bringing Additive Manufacturing to SMEs«

19.07.2017 | Event News

The technology with a feel for feelings

12.07.2017 | Event News

 
Latest News

NASA looks to solar eclipse to help understand Earth's energy system

21.07.2017 | Earth Sciences

Stanford researchers develop a new type of soft, growing robot

21.07.2017 | Power and Electrical Engineering

Vortex photons from electrons in circular motion

21.07.2017 | Physics and Astronomy

VideoLinks
B2B-VideoLinks
More VideoLinks >>>