DynaMed Weekly Update
November 24, 2009 Volume 4 Issue 47  
DynaMed Systematic Literature Surveillance

For the week ending November 20, 2009

 

Last week 839 articles were evaluated via DynaMed’s Systematic Literature Surveillance and 303 were added to DynaMed content.


Based on the editors’ criteria of selecting “articles most likely to change clinical practice,” two articles of significant interest were selected for the DynaMed Weekly Update.


Mammography Screening May Reduce Breast Cancer Mortality

 

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently updated their recommendations for breast cancer screening. These recommendations were based in part on a systematic review that included 8 randomized trials evaluating mammography screening for women ≥ 39 years old. Follow-up ranged from 11-20 years. Most trials were designed to compare the effects of inviting women for screening vs. no invitation rather than to directly compare screening vs. no screening. Invitation to mammography screening was associated with decreased risk of breast cancer mortality in all age strata for women aged 39-69 years (level 2 [mid-level] evidence).

 

For women aged 39-49 years, the pooled risk ratio (RR) for breast cancer mortality in screening groups was 0.85 (95% CI 0.75-0.96) in 8 trials with 348,219 women. The authors estimate that 1 breast cancer death would be prevented for every 1,904 women in this age group in a screening program. Mammography was also associated with reduced breast cancer mortality in women aged 50-59 years (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.99 in 6 trials), with 1 breast cancer death prevented for every 1,339 women recommended for screening, and in women aged 60-69 years (RR  0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.87 in 2 trials), with 1 breast cancer death prevented for every 377 women. There was no significant difference in breast cancer mortality in women aged 70-74 years in the only trial that included this age group.

 

The review also examined outcomes per screening round in a cohort of 600,830 women ≥ 40 years old who had mammograms between 2000-2005. Rates of false positive mammograms per 1,000 women screened were 97.8 for ages 40-49 years, 86.6 for 50-59 years and 79 for 60-69 years. In addition, for women aged 40-49 years, 5 biopsies were performed for each cancer detected compared with 3 biopsies per cancer detected for women aged 50-59 years and 2 biopsies per cancer detected in women aged 60-69 years.

 

The most serious potential harm from screening is “overdiagnosis,” meaning detection of cancers that would never have been symptomatic during the life of the woman. This can lead to unnecessary treatment with surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. The overdiagnosis rate was estimated to be 1%-10% based on increased rates of cancer detected in screening groups compared to control groups (Ann Intern Med 2009 Nov 17;151(10):727). However, there are many factors in addition to overdiagnosis that may increase the rate of cancers detected through screening (Breast Cancer Res 2005;7(6):266).

 

The USPSTF now recommends against routine screening for women aged 40-49 years, suggesting the decision to begin screening should be individualized based on each patient’s context and values (grade C recommendation). They recommend screening for women aged 50-74 years (grade B recommendation) and find insufficient data to make recommendations for women aged 75 years or older (grade I recommendation). USPSTF also recommends against clinicians teaching breast self-examination (grade D recommendation) and makes no recommendation about clinical breast exams (grade I recommendation). When mammography screening is done, USPSTF suggests every 2 years instead of annually (Ann Intern Med 2009 Nov 17;151(10):716). It should also be noted that the USPSTF recommendations do not apply to women who may be at increased risk for breast cancer due to factors such as genetics.

 

The benefits of breast cancer screening were also examined in a recent Cochrane review of 11 randomized trials (including the 8 above) with 616,327 women. There was no reduction in overall mortality associated with mammography (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97-1.01 in analysis of 8 trials), but there was a reduction in breast cancer mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.87 in analysis of 9 trials) (level 2 [mid-level] evidence). This reduction, however, was not statistically significant in an analysis restricted to 4 higher quality trials (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.79-1.02). Attendance rates for scheduled mammography ranged from 60%-100% for the first mammogram and 40%-89% on subsequent screenings (Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009 Oct 7;(4):CD001877).

 

For more information, see the Mammography for breast cancer screening topic in DynaMed.


Breast Cancer Screening Information for Patients

 

EBSCO Publishing’s Consumer Health editors have created a 3-page handout to explain current breast cancer screening evidence and guidelines to patients.

 

See Breast Cancer Screening: Research and Guidelines.

 

DynaMed’s Systematic Literature Surveillance is used to update Nursing Reference Center (NRC), Rehabilitation Reference Center (RRC), and Patient Education Reference Center (PERC), supporting EBSCO Publishing in providing current evidence-based references across the continuum of clinical care.


Subscribe FREE to DynaMed Weekly Update
To receive sign-up instructions, email us at DynaMedWU@ebscohost.com
with Subscribe in the subject line.

DynaMed Topic Activity

New summaries added to DynaMed this week:

 

·        Fever without apparent source in children aged 3-36 months

·        Left ventricular noncompaction

·        Lewy body disease

·        Medicare Hospital Outpatient Department Quality Measures


DynaMed Peer Review

We are currently seeking reviewers for:

 

·        Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture

·        Gout

·        Parapneumonic effusion and empyema in children


For more information, see
Editorial Policies for Authors & Reviewers and DynaMed Peer Review.


Point-of-Care Resources


Medical Calculators

DynaMed includes more than 500 clinical calculators, decision rules and statistics calculators to give clinicians even more decision making tools to use at the point of care. 

 

After logging in, click on Calculators in the upper right corner of the screen to access this new feature.

DynaMed Weekly Update RSS Feed

The DynaMed Weekly Update is available as a RSS Feed. Click the orange RSS icon (at the bottom right of the newsletter), then copy and paste the URL into your news feed reader.  For more information on RSS feeds, click here.

Share Update with a Colleague
DynaMed Weekly Update Archives

DynaMed Weekly Update is a compilation of 1 to 5 articles that are of significant interest to clinicians.  Articles are selected from DynaMed's Systematic Literature Surveillance as articles most likely to change clinical practice. Updates are prepared by the DynaMed Editorial Team which includes 28 clinicians from multiple disciplines. Send comments to DynaMedEditor@ebscohost.com. To learn more about DynaMed, go to www.ebscohost.com/dynamed.

Published by DynaMed
Copyright © 2009 EBSCO Publishing. All rights reserved.
DynaMed® is a registered trademark of and published by DynaMed LLC. Original date of on-line publication December 15, 1995 with continuous daily updating. ISSN: 1554-1177. Subscriptions and queries can be addressed to DynaMed LLC, EBSCO Publishing, 10 Estes St., Ipswich, Massachusetts, USA 01938-0602, telephone (978) 356-6500, facsimile (978) 356-6565, e-mail Editor@DynamicMedical.com. The opinions expressed herein are solely those of the authors and editors and may or may not represent the official position of cooperating or endorsing Medical Societies. Development of DynaMed was supported in part by the National Science Foundation through a Small Business Innovative Research grant. (All other support comes from subscriptions. No advertisements are accepted.)
RSS Feed