Mammographic surveillance in breast cancer patients aged 50 years or older: a synopsis of the Mammo-50 RCT
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Annual surveillance mammograms for an unspecified period, after treatment for early breast cancer, are widely practised in the United States of America and Europe. Current UK guidelines recommend annual mammograms for 5 years, then reverts to 3-yearly screening. The aim of this trial was to evaluate whether less than annual mammography was non-inferior in terms of breast cancer-specific survival and cost-effectiveness in women aged 50 years or older at diagnosis and 3 years post curative surgery. Methods We conducted a multicentre, randomised phase III trial of annual mammography versus less-frequent mammography (2-yearly after conservation surgery or 3-yearly after mastectomy). Women were eligible if aged ≥ 50 years at initial diagnosis of breast cancer (invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ) and recurrence-free 3 years post curative surgery. The trial was conducted at 114 NHS hospitals in the UK. Participants were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to annual or less-frequent mammograms; followed up for 6 years. Coprimary outcomes were breast cancer-specific-survival and cost-effectiveness; secondary outcomes included recurrence-free interval and overall survival. Analyses were by intention to treat, with a pre-planned per-protocol analysis. Planned sample size was 5000. Clinical results are now reported. Results Five thousand two hundred and thirty-five women were randomised between April 2014 and September 2018. With a median of 5.7-year follow-up, 343 women have died, of whom 116 died of breast cancer (61 on annual arm; 55 on less-frequent arm). Breast cancer-specific-survival at 5 years was 98% on both arms with a hazard ratio of 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.32), which demonstrated non-inferiority of less-frequent mammograms at the 3% margin (non-inferiority p < 0.0001) and the 1% margin (non-inferiority p = 0.003). Non-inferiority was demonstrated at the 2% level for both recurrence-free interval [hazard ratio 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.28); non-inferiority p = 0.0024] and overall survival [hazard ratio 1.07 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.33); non-inferiority p = 0.008]. Less-frequent mammograms were associated with a significant cost saving (mean difference £544, 95% confidence interval −£1116 to £26), heavily driven by mammogram costs. Incorporating societal costs resulted in a larger cost-saving (£1543 per person, 95% confidence interval −£2416 to −£669), increasing cost-effectiveness. There was no impact of less-frequent mammograms on patients’ quality of life. Conclusion For patients aged ≥ 50 years and 3 years post diagnosis, less-frequent mammograms were non-inferior and cost-effective compared with annual mammograms, with no detriment to patients’ quality of life. Mammo-50 provides evidence to inform guideline development. Limitations Adherence to the mammographic schedules was 76%, though the per-protocol analysis showed no difference compared to the intention to treat results. The majority of the participants had small lower-grade oestrogen receptor-positive tumours and were from a White ethnic group. Future work More research is needed for women with ductal carcinoma in situ; women aged under 50 years old at diagnosis and different ethnic groups, especially those women of Black ethnicity who tend to present younger. Funding This synopsis presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme as award number 11/25/03.
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.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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 découle