Season of breast cancer diagnosis and probability of death from breast cancer in the United States

2010 ◽  
pp. NA-NA ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivanka Stajner
2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 436-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bilal Farooqi ◽  
Betsy Smith ◽  
Mudit Chowdhary ◽  
Susan Pavoni ◽  
Aadil Modi ◽  
...  

JAMA Surgery ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 153 (6) ◽  
pp. 594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sahael M. Stapleton ◽  
Tawakalitu O. Oseni ◽  
Yanik J. Bababekov ◽  
Ya-Ching Hung ◽  
David C. Chang

Author(s):  
Mary C. White ◽  
Marion (Mhel) H. E. Kavanaugh-Lynch ◽  
Shauntay Davis-Patterson ◽  
Nancy Buermeyer

Advances in breast cancer science, early detection, and treatment have resulted in improvements in breast cancer survival but not in breast cancer incidence. After skin cancer, breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis in the United States. Each year, nearly a quarter million U.S. women receive a breast cancer diagnosis, and the number continues to rise each year with the growth in the population of older women. Although much remains to be understood about breast cancer origins and prevention, action can be taken on the existing scientific knowledge to address the systemic factors that drive breast cancer risk at the population level. The California Breast Cancer Research Program funded a team at Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP) to convene leaders in advocacy, policy, and research related to breast cancer prevention from across the state of California. The objective was the development of a strategic plan to direct collective efforts toward specific and measurable objectives to reduce the incidence of breast cancer. The structured, innovative approach used by BCPP to integrate scientific evidence with community perspectives provides a model for other states to consider, to potentially change the future trajectory of breast cancer incidence in the United States.


2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1053-1065 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephenie C. Lemon ◽  
Jane G. Zapka ◽  
Lynn Clemow ◽  
Barbara Estabrook ◽  
Ken Fletcher

2006 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine M. Velicer ◽  
Susan R. Heckbert ◽  
Carolyn Rutter ◽  
Johanna W. Lampe ◽  
Kathi Malone

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (21) ◽  
pp. 2206-2216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan M. Eberth ◽  
Ying Xu ◽  
Grace L. Smith ◽  
Yu Shen ◽  
Jing Jiang ◽  
...  

Purpose Use of needle biopsy is a proposed quality measure in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, yet prior literature documents underuse. Nationally, little is known regarding the contribution of a patient's surgeon to needle biopsy use, and knowledge regarding downstream impact of needle biopsy on breast cancer care is incomplete. Methods Using 2003 to 2007 nationwide Medicare data from 89,712 patients with breast cancer and 12,405 surgeons, logistic regression evaluated the following three outcomes: surgeon consultation before versus after biopsy, use of needle biopsy (yes or no), and number of surgeries for cancer treatment. Multilevel analyses were adjusted for physician, patient, and structural covariates. Results Needle biopsy was used in 68.4% (n = 61,353) of all patients and only 53.7% of patients seen by a surgeon before biopsy (n = 32,953/61,312). Patient factors associated with surgeon consultation before biopsy included Medicaid coverage, rural residence, residence more than 8.1 miles from a radiologic facility performing needle biopsy, and no mammogram within 60 days before consultation. Among patients with surgeon consultation before biopsy, surgeon factors such as absence of board certification, training outside the United States, low case volume, earlier decade of medical school graduation, and lack of specialization in surgical oncology were negatively correlated with receipt of needle biopsy. Risk of multiple cancer surgeries was 33.7% for patients undergoing needle biopsy compared with 69.6% for those who did not (adjusted relative risk, 2.08; P < .001). Conclusion Needle biopsy is underused in the United States, resulting in a negative impact on breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. Surgeon-level interventions may improve needle biopsy rates and, accordingly, quality of care.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document