BACKGROUND In the National Polyp Study (NPS), colorectal cancer was prevented by colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps. We evaluated the long-term effect of colonoscopic polypectomy in a study on mortality from colorectal cancer. METHODS We included in this analysis all patients prospectively referred for initial colonoscopy (between 1980 and 1990) at NPS clinical centers who had polyps (adenomas and nonadenomas). The National Death Index was used to identify deaths and to determine the cause of death; follow-up time was as long as 23 years. Mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with adenomas removed was compared with the expected incidence-based mortality from colorectal cancer in the general population, as estimated from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program, and with the observed mortality from colorectal cancer among patients with nonadenomatous polyps (internal control group). RESULTS Among 2602 patients who had adenomas removed during participation in the study, after a median of 15.8 years, 1246 patients had died from any cause and 12 had died from colorectal cancer. Given an estimated 25.4 expected deaths from colorectal cancer in the general population, the standardized incidence-based mortality ratio was 0.47 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26 to 0.80) with colonoscopic polypectomy, suggesting a 53% reduction in mortality. Mortality from colorectal cancer was similar among patients with adenomas and those with nonadenomatous polyps during the first 10 years after polypectomy (relative risk, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 10.6). CONCLUSIONS These findings support the hypothesis that colonoscopic removal of adenomatous polyps prevents death from colorectal cancer. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others.)

/pdf/colonoscopic-polypectomy-and-long-term-prevention-of-26sw5itn6w.pdf

Colonoscopic Polypectomy and Long-Term Prevention of Colorectal-Cancer Deaths

BACKGROUND We used modeling techniques to assess the relative and absolute contributions of screening mammography and adjuvant treatment to the reduction in breast-cancer mortality in the United States from 1975 to 2000. METHODS A consortium of investigators developed seven independent statistical models of breast-cancer incidence and mortality. All seven groups used the same sources to obtain data on the use of screening mammography, adjuvant treatment, and benefits of treatment with respect to the rate of death from breast cancer. RESULTS The proportion of the total reduction in the rate of death from breast cancer attributed to screening varied in the seven models from 28 to 65 percent (median, 46 percent), with adjuvant treatment contributing the rest. The variability across models in the absolute contribution of screening was larger than it was for treatment, reflecting the greater uncertainty associated with estimating the benefit of screening. CONCLUSIONS Seven statistical models showed that both screening mammography and treatment have helped reduce the rate of death from breast cancer in the United States.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa050518

Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer

Each year the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of existing recommendations for early cancer detection, including updates, and/or emerging issues that are relevant to screening for cancer. In last year's article, the guidelines regarding screening for the early detection of prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers were updated, as was the narrative pertaining to testing for early lung cancer detection. Although none of the ACS's guidelines were updated in 2001, work is proceeding on an update of screening recommendations for breast and cervical cancer and an update of these guidelines will be announced in the January/February 2003 issue of CA. As in previous issues, we review recommendations for the "cancer-related check-up," in which clinical encounters provide case-finding and health counseling opportunities. Finally, we provide an update of the most recent data pertaining to participation rates in cancer screening by age, gender, and ethnicity from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.3322/canjclin.52.1.8

American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer.

Screening with mammography uses X-ray imaging to find breast cancer before a lump can be felt. The goal is to treat cancer earlier, when a cure is more likely. The review includes seven trials that involved 600,000 women in the age range 39 to 74 years who were randomly assigned to receive screening mammograms or not. The studies which provided the most reliable information showed that screening did not reduce breast cancer mortality. Studies that were potentially more biased (less carefully done) found that screening reduced breast cancer mortality. However, screening will result in some women getting a cancer diagnosis even though their cancer would not have led to death or sickness. Currently, it is not possible to tell which women these are, and they are therefore likely to have breasts or lumps removed and to receive radiotherapy unnecessarily. If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% after 13 years of follow-up and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily. Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings.
Women invited to screening should be fully informed of both the benefits and harms. To help ensure that the requirements for informed choice for women contemplating whether or not to attend a screening programme can be met, we have written an evidence-based leaflet for lay people that is available in several languages on www.cochrane.dk. Because of substantial advances in treatment and greater breast cancer awareness since the trials were carried out, it is likely that the absolute effect of screening today is smaller than in the trials. Recent observational studies show more overdiagnosis than in the trials and very little or no reduction in the incidence of advanced cancers with screening.

/pdf/screening-for-breast-cancer-with-mammography-36k7l5kzia.pdf

Screening for breast cancer with mammography.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(02)08020-0.pdf

Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials

Breast cancer, reported dietary intakes and dietary biomarkers : A case-control study in Gujarat, India

CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2008 Abstracts

Abstract #5066 

BACKGROUND: The cell cycle machinery acts as an integration point for information transduced through complex and redundant upstream oncogenic signalling pathways Multiparameter analysis of core regulatory proteins involved in G1-S and G2-M cell cycle phase transitions provides a powerful biomarker readout for assessment of the cell cycle state We have applied this novel algorithm to breast cancer, investigating its cell cycle kinetics, and determining how this impacts on pathobiology and disease progression in-vivo METHODS AND FINDINGS: Protein expression profiles of key constituents of the DNA replication licensing pathway (Mcm2, geminin) and mitotic machinery (Plk1, Aurora A, Aurora substrate Histone H3S10ph), mediators of G1-S and G2-M transition respectively, were generated for a cohort of 182 patients Arrested differentiation and development of genomic instability was associated with increased engagement of cells into the cell division cycle (p<00001) Three unique cell cycle phenotypes were identified; (I) well differentiated tumours composed predominantly of Mcm2 negative cells indicative of an out-of-cycle state (18% of cases), (II) high Mcm2 expressing tumours but with low geminin, Aurora A, Plk1 and H3S10ph levels (S-G2-M progression markers) indicative of a G1 delayed/arrested state (24% cases), (III) high expressing Mcm2 tumours, but also expressing high levels of the S-G2-M progression markers, indicative of accelerated cell cycle progression (58% of cases) The accelerated cell cycle phenotype had a significantly higher risk of relapse when compared with out-of-cycle and G1 delayed/arrested tumour phenotypes (HR=390 [181-840], p<0001) Notably high grade tumours with the G1 delayed/arrested phenotype showed an identical low risk of relapse to well differentiated out-of-cycle tumours (HR=100 [022-446], p=099), suggesting that many patients are receiving inappropriate S-G2-M phase directed adjuvant chemotherapy CONCLUSIONS: This biomarker algorithm provides novel insights into the cell cycle state of dynamic tumour cell populations in-vivo, information that impacts on individualised therapeutic decisions The cell cycle phenotype has a major influence on disease progression, identifying those patients at most risk of relapse Importantly, it is only patients displaying an accelerated phenotype, tumours that show S-G2-M phase transit, that are likely to derive benefit from S and G2-M phase specific adjuvant chemotherapeutic agents and mechanistic drugs

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(2 Suppl):Abstract nr 5066

T. C. Prevost

Papers

Breast cancer, reported dietary intakes and dietary biomarkers : A case-control study in Gujarat, India

Cell cycle phase progression analysis identifies unique replication phenotypes of major prognostic and predictive significance in cancer.

155 diagnosis of bladder cancer by combined detection of minichromosome maintenance 5 protein and nmp22 in urine