Abstract SS1-1: Breast cancer early detection strategies in absence of screening mammography
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract In spite of the current controversy surrounding over-diagnosis, mammography remains the gold standard for breast cancer screening in the developed world. However, mammography is not suitable technology for low-income countries because of its high cost and the sophisticated infrastructure that is needed to realize its effectiveness. Breast self examination (BSE) may appear to be an appropriate screening procedure; however, randomized trials in the erstwhile Soviet Union and China have produced negative results largely because of non-compliance. Clinical breast examination (CBE) is also an attractive option for low-income countries. Robust evidence of effectiveness of CBE from randomized trials of head-to-head comparison of CBE with no screening is lacking. Indirect evidence from the Canadian NBSS suggests that, in women aged 50 – 59, mammography adds little to mortality reduction over and above that achieved by CBE alone. A randomized trial in Mumbai is underway comparing CBE + BSE teaching with no screening and the results are expected in 2016. Thus, at the present time, direct evidence is lacking to recommend CBE as a screening procedure in low-income countries. The incidence of breast cancer, although rising, remains substantially lower in low-income countries than that in the developed world. For example, in India, the crude incidence rate is 18.45 per 100,000 compared to 157.1 in the US. Low incidence rates raise serious questions about cost-effectiveness of screening. Lack of adequate and easily accessible breast cancer treatment facilities and that of reliable cancer registries are other barriers to screening in these countries. Lack of awareness about hazards of breast cancer is another major challenge since this leads to low motivation and poor compliance to screening. A high degree of compliance is essential at every level of screening for it to be successful. These include compliance to the screening test, attendance at the referral center for further investigations, compliance to the prescribed treatment if cancer is confirmed, completing the entire course of treatment which can be prolonged and attendance at regular follow-up. Although the Mumbai study recorded >70% compliance overall, this was achieved at a high man-power cost. Nearly 100 full-time personnel had to be engaged to make door-to-door visits on multiple occasions to persuade women to comply with the various steps of screening in addition to examining 75,000 women every two years and maintaining yearly surveillance on the control group. The study highlighted that for screening to be successful in low-awareness countries, a vertical programme is essential. A rough estimate based on the Mumbai experience suggests that a vertical programme to screen all women aged 35 – 64 in India, and to achieve ∼70% compliance, would require over US$ 100 million per year in man-power cost alone. Whether this money is better spent on strengthening breast cancer treatment facilities, for developing human resource in cancer care or for remedying the many deficiencies in the health-care delivery system in general is the moot question. Citation Format: Mitra I. Breast cancer early detection strategies in absence of screening mammography. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr SS1-1.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,017 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».