Breast cancer risk assessment in a mammography screening program and participation in the IBIS-II chemoprevention trial

It has been shown in several studies that antihormonal compounds can offer effective prophylactic treatment to prevent breast cancer. In view of the low participation rates in chemoprevention trials, the purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of women taking part in a population-b...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inBreast cancer research and treatment Vol. 121; no. 1; pp. 101 - 110
Main Authors Loehberg, Christian R, Jud, Sebastian M, Haeberle, Lothar, Heusinger, Katharina, Dilbat, Gerhard, Hein, Alexander, Rauh, Claudia, Dall, Peter, Rix, Nadine, Heinrich, Sabrina, Buchholz, Stefan, Lex, Benno, Reichler, Barbara, Adamietz, Boris, Schulz-Wendtland, Ruediger, Beckmann, Matthias W, Fasching, Peter A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Boston Boston : Springer US 01.05.2010
Springer US
Springer
Springer Nature B.V
Springer Verlag
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:It has been shown in several studies that antihormonal compounds can offer effective prophylactic treatment to prevent breast cancer. In view of the low participation rates in chemoprevention trials, the purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of women taking part in a population-based mammography screening program who wished to obtain information about the risk of breast cancer and then participate in the the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study II (IBIS-II) trial, a randomized double-blind controlled chemoprevention trial comparing anastrozole with placebo. A paper-based survey was conducted in a population-based mammography screening program in Germany between 2007 and 2009. All women who met the criteria for the mammography screening program were invited to complete a questionnaire. A total of 2,524 women completed the questionnaire, and 17.7% (n = 446) met the eligibility criteria for the IBIS-II trial after risk assessment. The women who wished to receive further information about chemoprevention were significantly younger (P < 0.01) and had significantly more children (P = 0.03) and significantly more relatives with breast cancer (P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the participants with regard to body mass index or hormone replacement therapy. Normal mammographic findings at screening were the main reason (42%) for declining to participate in the IBIS-II trial or attend risk counseling. The ultimate rate of recruitment to the IBIS-II trial was very low (three women). Offering chemoprevention to women within a mammography screening unit as part of a paper-based survey resulted in low participation rates for both, the survey and the final participation in the IBIS-II trial. More individualized approaches and communication of breast cancer risk at the time of the risk assessment might be helpful to increase the participation and the understanding of chemopreventive approaches.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0845-8
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0167-6806
1573-7217
DOI:10.1007/s10549-010-0845-8