2026-10-19T01:56:57Zhttps://ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/oai/request

oai:ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net:ebyu/136482026-10-18T21:13:28Zopenairedrivercom_ebyu_10000col_ebyu_10001

Poor biological factors and prognosis of interval breast cancers: Long-term results of bahçeşehir (Istanbul) breast cancer screening project in TurkeyCabioglu, NeslihanGürdal, Sibel ÖzkanKayhan, ArdaÖzaydın, NilüferŞahin, CennetCan, ÖmürÖzçınar, BeyzaAykuter, GönülVatandaş, GülçinAribal, ErkinÖzmen, VahitBiomarkers, TumorBreast NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansPrognosisTurkeyepidermal growth factor receptor 2estrogen receptorKi 67 antigenprogesterone receptortumor markeradultagedArticlebreast cancercancer diagnosiscancer prognosiscancer screeningcancer stagingcontrolled studydisease free survivalhumanmajor clinical studymammographymiddle agedpriority journalTurkey (republic)breast tumorearly cancer diagnosisPURPOSE The Turkish Bahçeşehir Breast Cancer Screening Project was a 10-year, organized, population-based screening program carried out in Bahçeşehir county, Istanbul. Our aim was to examine the biologic features and outcome of screen-detected and interval breast cancers during the 10-year study period. METHODS Between 2009 and 2019, 2-view mammograms were obtained at 2-year intervals for women aged 40 to 69 years. Clinicopathological characteristics including ER, PR, HER2-neu, and Ki-67 status were analyzed for those diagnosed with breast cancer. RESULTS In 8,758 screened women, 131 breast cancers (1.5%) were detected. The majority of patients (82.3%) had prognostic stage 0-I disease. Contrarily, patients with interval cancers (n = 15; 11.4%) were more likely to have a worse prognostic stage (II-IV disease; odds ratio [OR], 3.59, 95% CI, 0.9 to 14.5) and high Ki-67 scores (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 0.9 to 11.2). Interval cancers detected within 1 year were more likely to have a luminal B (57.1% v 31.9%) and triple-negative (14.3% v 1%) subtype and less likely to have a luminal A subtype (28.6% v 61.5%; P =.04). Patients with interval cancers had a poor outcome in 10-year disease-specific (DSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) compared with those with screen-detected cancers (DSS: 68.2% v 98.1%, P =.002; DFS: 78.6% v 96.5%, P =.011). CONCLUSION Our findings suggest the majority of screen-detected breast cancers exhibited a luminal A subtype profile with an excellent prognosis. However, interval cancers were more likely to have aggressive subtypes such as luminal B subtype or triple-negative cancers associated with a poor prognosis requiring other preventive strategies. © 2020 by American Society of Clinical Oncology Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 LicenseAmerican Society of Clinical Oncology2020Articlehttps://rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/r/ebyu/13648https://doi.org/10.1200/go.20.001452687-8941enJCO Global Oncologyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttps://ebyu-rdlopen.rawdatalibrary.net/tr/items/ebyu/13648