BioNanoScience

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 407–411 | Cite as

Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer: Public Health and Mammographic Screening

  • Rinat Gamirov
  • Ludmila Komarova
  • Rustem Khasanov
  • Regina Gamirova
Article
  • 40 Downloads

Abstract

Malignant breast tumors are the leading oncological pathology (after skin cancer) in the female population all over the world (more than 20%). According to American Cancer Society, breast cancer is expected to account for 30% of all new cancer cases among women in 2017 (Simon, 2017). The research in the sphere of the timely diagnosis of malignant neoplasms led to the development and further widespread implementation of screening programs, which help to reveal the disease before the onset of symptoms or signs of illness. The paper discusses different scientific approaches to mass screening, various opinions concerning the real impact of screening and contemporary treatment into breast cancer mortality decrease, and presents the results of a breast screening program in the Republic of Tatarstan (Russian Federation). The results showed the effectiveness of this diagnostic method: in 59,000 women aged 50–69 years in total, there were revealed 373 cases of breast cancer (0.63%), in which breast cancer of the I–II stage was 80%. Of the histological forms, 45.4% in the detected malignant neoplasms were presented by invasive ductal cancer, 24.8%—by invasive lobular carcinoma, and the proportion of non-invasive cancer was 4%. Cancer without metastatic involvement of lymphatic nodes (T1–4N0) occurred in 63% of cases. The paper discusses such negative factors of mass mammographic screening as overdiagnosis, false-positive results, and overtreatment. The analyses of existing research all over the world show that since the problem has been actively studied all over the world, the approach to the analysis of screening results has changed to the prevalence of individual approach to each case, the number of cases connected with overdiagnosis is constantly reduced, and the quality of visualization is rapidly improving due to the success of interdisciplinary research and rapid technical progress.

Keywords

Public health Breast cancer Mammography Mass screening Cancer screening Early diagnosis of cancer Invasive ductal cancer Invasive lobular carcinoma 

References

  1. 1.
    Kapri, A. I., Starinskiy, V. V., Petrova, G. V. (2017). The status of oncological care for the population of Russia in 2016. Moscow.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Semiglazov, V. F. (2004). Screening of breast cancer. Proceedings of the VIII Russian Cancer Congress. Moscow.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Komarova, L. E. (2015). Mammographic screening (state of the issue and prospects). Rossijskij Onkologicheskij Zhurnal, 20(4), 9–16.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gamirov, R. R., Komarova, L. E., Khasanov, R. S., Shakirov, K. T., & Mazitov, B. K. (2014). The organisation and results of mammography screening of the female population of Kazan and separate territories of the Republic of Tatarstan. Povolzhskij Onkologicheskij Vestnik, 4, 4–10.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mercado, C. L. (2014). BI-RADS update. Radiologic Clinics of North America, 52(3), 481–487.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Axmaker, L. (2005). Breast cancer death rates. Decline slowly but steadily. https://www.cancerorg/doc_root/nws/contents. January, 2005.
  7. 7.
    Berry, D. A. (2005). Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer death rates. New England Journal of Medicine, 27, 1784–1792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jorgensen, K. J., & Gotzche, P. C. (2009). Overdiagnosis is publicly organized mammography screening: systemic review of incidence trends. British Medical Journal, 339, b2587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holving, S., Thoresen, S., & Fretli, S. (2004). The cumulative risk of a false-positive recall in the Norwegian breast cancer screening program. Cancer, 101, 1501–1507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. (2012). The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet, 380(9855), 1778–1786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gautam, A., Bhateja, V., Tiwari, A., & Satapathy, S. C. (2018). An improved mammogram classification approach using back propagation neural network. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput., 542, 369–376.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dheeba, J., Jaya, T., & Singh, N. A. (2017). Breast cancer risk assessment and diagnosis model using fuzzy support vector machine based expert system. Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 29(5), 1011–1021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hassanzarei, S., Hashemi, M., Sattarifard, H., Hashemi, S. M., & Bahari, G. (2017). Genetic polymorphisms in long noncoding RNA H19 are associated with breast cancer susceptibility in Iranian population. Meta Gene, 14, 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Molavi, O., Narimani, F., Asiaee, F., Sharifi, S., & Tarhriz, V. (2017). Silibinin sensitizes chemo-resistant breast cancer cells to chemotherapy. Pharmaceutical Biology, 55(1), 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hermelink, K., Bühner, M., Sckopke, P., Neufeld, F., Kaste, E. et al. (2017). Chemotherapy and post-traumatic stress in the causation of cognitive dysfunction in breast cancer patients. Journal of the National Cancer Institute.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx057.
  16. 16.
    Woitek, R., Spick, C., Schernthaner, M., Rudas, M., Kapetas, P., et al. (2017). A simple classification system (the tree flowchart) for breast MRI can reduce the number of unnecessary biopsies in MRI-only lesions. European Radiology, 27(9), 3799–3809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klauber-De More, N. (2005-2006). Tumor biology of breast cancer in young women. Breast Disease, 23, 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dobi, Á., Kelemen, G., Kaizer, L., Weiczner, R., Thurzó, L., & Kahán, Z. (2011). Breast cancer under 40 years of age: increased number and worse prognosis. Pathology Oncology Research, 17(2), 425–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Simon S. (2017). Cancer facts and figures: death rate down 25% since 1991. https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/cancer-facts-and-figures-death-rate-down-25-since-1991.html, 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Republican Clinical Oncology DispensaryMinistry of Health of the Republic of TatarstanKazanRussia
  2. 2.Federal State Budgetary Institution “N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology” of the Ministry of Health of the Russian FederationMoscowRussia
  3. 3.Kazan State Medical Academy – Branch Campus of the FSBEI RMACPE MOHKazanRussia
  4. 4.Laboratory of Clinical LinguisticsKazan Federal UniversityKazanRussia
  5. 5.Institute of Fundamental Medicine and BiologyKazan Federal UniversityKazanRussia

Personalised recommendations