18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Breast cancer mortality and associated factors in São Paulo State, Brazil: an ecological analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Identify the factors associated with the age-standardised breast cancer mortality rate in the municipalities of State of São Paulo (SSP), Brazil, in the period from 2006 to 2012.

          Design

          Ecological study of the breast cancer mortality rate standardised by age, as the dependent variable, having each of the 645 municipalities in the SSP as the unit of analysis.

          Settings

          The female resident population aged 15 years or older, by age group and municipality, in 2009 (mid-term), obtained from public dataset (Informatics Department of the Unified Health System).

          Participants

          Women 15 years or older who died of breast cancer in the SSP were selected for the calculation of the breast cancer mortality rate, according to the municipality and age group, from 2006 to 2012.

          Main outcome measures

          Mortality rates for each municipality calculated by the direct standardisation method, using the age structure of the population of SSP in 2009 as the standard.

          Results

          In the final linear regression model, breast cancer mortality, in the municipal level, was directly associated with rates of nulliparity (p<0.0001), mammography (p<0.0001) and private healthcare (p=0.006).

          Conclusions

          The findings that mammography ratio was associated, in the municipal level, with increased mortality add to the evidence of a probable overestimation of benefits and underestimation of risks associated with this form of screening. The same paradoxical trend of increased mortality with screening was found in recent individual-level studies, indicating the need to expand informed choice for patients, primary prevention actions and individualised screening. Additional studies should be conducted to explore if there is a causality link in this association.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Overdiagnosis in cancer.

          This article summarizes the phenomenon of cancer overdiagnosis-the diagnosis of a "cancer" that would otherwise not go on to cause symptoms or death. We describe the two prerequisites for cancer overdiagnosis to occur: the existence of a silent disease reservoir and activities leading to its detection (particularly cancer screening). We estimated the magnitude of overdiagnosis from randomized trials: about 25% of mammographically detected breast cancers, 50% of chest x-ray and/or sputum-detected lung cancers, and 60% of prostate-specific antigen-detected prostate cancers. We also review data from observational studies and population-based cancer statistics suggesting overdiagnosis in computed tomography-detected lung cancer, neuroblastoma, thyroid cancer, melanoma, and kidney cancer. To address the problem, patients must be adequately informed of the nature and the magnitude of the trade-off involved with early cancer detection. Equally important, researchers need to work to develop better estimates of the magnitude of overdiagnosis and develop clinical strategies to help minimize it.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diabetes mellitus and risk of breast cancer: a meta-analysis.

            Diabetes mellitus has been associated with an increased risk of several types of cancers, but its relationship with breast cancer remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies to assess the evidence regarding the association between diabetes and risk of breast cancer. Studies were identified by searching MEDLINE (1966-February 2007) and the references of retrieved articles. We identified 20 studies (5 case-control and 15 cohort studies) that reported relative risk (RR) estimates (odds ratio, rate ratio/hazard ratio, or standardized incidence ratio) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the relation between diabetes (largely Type II diabetes) and breast cancer incidence. Summary RRs were calculated using a random-effects model. Analysis of all 20 studies showed that women with (versus without) diabetes had a statistically significant 20% increased risk of breast cancer (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.12-1.28). The summary estimates were similar for case-control studies (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.05-1.32) and cohort studies (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.30). Meta-analysis of 5 cohort studies on diabetes and mortality from breast cancer yielded a summary RR of 1.24 (95% CI, 0.95-1.62) for women with (versus without) diabetes. Findings from this meta-analysis indicate that diabetes is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Screening for breast cancer with mammography

              A variety of estimates of the benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer have been published and national policies vary. To assess the effect of screening for breast cancer with mammography on mortality and morbidity. We searched PubMed (22 November 2012) and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (22 November 2012). Randomised trials comparing mammographic screening with no mammographic screening. Two authors independently extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information. Eight eligible trials were identified. We excluded a trial because the randomisation had failed to produce comparable groups.The eligible trials included 600,000 women in the analyses in the age range 39 to 74 years. Three trials with adequate randomisation did not show a statistically significant reduction in breast cancer mortality at 13 years (relative risk (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 1.02); four trials with suboptimal randomisation showed a significant reduction in breast cancer mortality with an RR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83). The RR for all seven trials combined was 0.81 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.87). We found that breast cancer mortality was an unreliable outcome that was biased in favour of screening, mainly because of differential misclassification of cause of death. The trials with adequate randomisation did not find an effect of screening on total cancer mortality, including breast cancer, after 10 years (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10) or on all-cause mortality after 13 years (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.03).Total numbers of lumpectomies and mastectomies were significantly larger in the screened groups (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.42), as were number of mastectomies (RR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.32). The use of radiotherapy was similarly increased whereas there was no difference in the use of chemotherapy (data available in only two trials). If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% 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. To help ensure that the women are fully informed before they decide whether or not to attend screening, 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.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2017
                23 August 2017
                : 7
                : 8
                : e016395
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentDepartamento de Saúde , Ciclos de Vida e Sociedade da Faculdade de Saúde Pública, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [2 ] Centro de Vigilância Epidemiológica “Prof. Alexandre Vranjac”, Secretaria de Estado da Saúde de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [3 ] departmentDepartamento de Saúde Ambiental , Faculdade de Saúde Pública, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [4 ] departmentDepartamento de Patologia , Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [5 ] departmentDepartamento de Enfermagem Materno-Infantil e Saúde Pública , Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [6 ] departmentDepartamento de Medicina Veterinária Preventiva , Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                [7 ] departmentSecretaria Municipal de Saúde de São Paulo , Coordenação de Epidemiologia e Informação , São Paulo, Brazil
                [8 ] departmentDepartamento Epidemiologia , Faculdade de Saúde Pública, Universidade de São Paulo , São Paulo, Brazil
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Francisco Chiaravalloti-Neto; franciscochiara@ 123456usp.br
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2686-8740
                Article
                bmjopen-2017-016395
                10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016395
                5629728
                28838894
                5c9d90b0-e8df-4697-97e6-82586bf424ef
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 10 February 2017
                : 09 June 2017
                : 05 July 2017
                Categories
                Epidemiology
                Research
                1506
                1692
                1717
                655
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Medicine
                breast tumours,epidemiology,public health
                Medicine
                breast tumours, epidemiology, public health

                Comments

                Comment on this article