Breast cancer screening 'works and we should move on': researchers - Women should undergo breast cancer screening because it halves the chance of them dying of the disease, according to a new study that claims to draw a line under the controversy.
Doubts have increasingly been raised over the benefits of mammography screening in recent years.
The Australian study backs up what the majority of cancer experts think - that breast cancer screening does save lives.
A minority of academics question whether it cuts death rates at all, while more have raised concerns about the numbers of women who go through treatment unnecessarily due to a postive test result.
Last October Professor Sir Mike Richards, the Department of Health’s cancer ‘tzar’, announced he would be leading a review of the evidence.
But now Australian scientists have published research which they claim definitively shows x-ray screening works, and that it is time to “move on”.
The study compared screening rates in 427 Australian women aged 50 to 69 who had died from breast cancer, against screening rates among similar 3,650 women of the same age who were still alive.
The 'case-controlled' study found screening attendance was much lower in those who had died of the disease, which kills more than 12,000 women a year in Britain.
The academics, from Melbourne University, said this finding was consistent with “numerous studies from around the world”.
“Comparison with similar studies showed an average estimate of a 49 per cent reduced risk of dying,” said the university team. The study is published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.
Dr Carolyn Nickson, who led it, said: “Sound research methods have been used in this study.
“I believe it is time to move on from the debate about whether screening reduces mortality and to instead direct research resources to help improve the program for women who choose to use it.”
Last year academics at the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Denmark concluded mammography had “little detectable impact" on death rates, after comparing similar countries or regions that had introduced screening programmes at different times. Improved treatment was much more important, they said.
The same researchers later argued that, far from being harmless, screening led to up to 10 women having unnecessary treatment - including surgery and radiotherapy - for every life saved.
The problem is that screening picks up both tumours that will spread and those that will not. The difficulty is telling which is which.
Karsten Jørgensen, one of the researchers, said the problem with case-controlled studies was, no matter how well designed, they could never actually prove they were comparing like with like.
The most important problem was what is called "self-selection bias", he said, explaining: "Those who attend are simply more healthy for a number of reasons than those who choose not to."
A Department of Health spokesman said Prof Richards’ review would be published “in the next few months”.
He said current advice remained unchanged: to urge all women to go to screening when invited. ( telegraph.co.uk )
Doubts have increasingly been raised over the benefits of mammography screening in recent years.
The Australian study backs up what the majority of cancer experts think - that breast cancer screening does save lives.
A minority of academics question whether it cuts death rates at all, while more have raised concerns about the numbers of women who go through treatment unnecessarily due to a postive test result.
Last October Professor Sir Mike Richards, the Department of Health’s cancer ‘tzar’, announced he would be leading a review of the evidence.
But now Australian scientists have published research which they claim definitively shows x-ray screening works, and that it is time to “move on”.
The study compared screening rates in 427 Australian women aged 50 to 69 who had died from breast cancer, against screening rates among similar 3,650 women of the same age who were still alive.
The 'case-controlled' study found screening attendance was much lower in those who had died of the disease, which kills more than 12,000 women a year in Britain.
The academics, from Melbourne University, said this finding was consistent with “numerous studies from around the world”.
“Comparison with similar studies showed an average estimate of a 49 per cent reduced risk of dying,” said the university team. The study is published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.
Dr Carolyn Nickson, who led it, said: “Sound research methods have been used in this study.
“I believe it is time to move on from the debate about whether screening reduces mortality and to instead direct research resources to help improve the program for women who choose to use it.”
Last year academics at the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Denmark concluded mammography had “little detectable impact" on death rates, after comparing similar countries or regions that had introduced screening programmes at different times. Improved treatment was much more important, they said.
The same researchers later argued that, far from being harmless, screening led to up to 10 women having unnecessary treatment - including surgery and radiotherapy - for every life saved.
The problem is that screening picks up both tumours that will spread and those that will not. The difficulty is telling which is which.
Karsten Jørgensen, one of the researchers, said the problem with case-controlled studies was, no matter how well designed, they could never actually prove they were comparing like with like.
The most important problem was what is called "self-selection bias", he said, explaining: "Those who attend are simply more healthy for a number of reasons than those who choose not to."
A Department of Health spokesman said Prof Richards’ review would be published “in the next few months”.
He said current advice remained unchanged: to urge all women to go to screening when invited. ( telegraph.co.uk )
0 komentar:
Post a Comment