PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

K Gower-Thomas

Publications and source records attributed to K Gower-Thomas.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Is general practitioner access to breast imaging safe?

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the consultant radiologist run open-access breast radiology service (OAR) to investigate whether the system was safe or whether cancers were being missed. METHODS: A retrospective review of the national cancer registry database to identify patients presenting with symptomatic breast cancer in the catchment area of the Royal Glamorgan Hospital (RGH) from April 2000 to April 2002 was performed. Pathology, radiology and outpatient records were reviewed to identify patients previously assessed at the RGH. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients with breast cancer were diagnosed via the OAR and 159 by the breast clinic (BC). Twelve patients with breast cancer were diagnosed after their initial presentation. Eight patients had been previously seen for benign breast lesions. Four patients had missed breast cancers (two were initially seen via the BC and two via the OAR). A significant difference in the number of cancers missed by the two referral routes was not observed (p = 0.221). CONCLUSION: OAR is as accurate a means of diagnosing breast cancer as traditional rapid access BCs. Women presenting with discrete lumps with no radiological abnormality should still undergo assessment with clinical fine core-biopsy.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Two-view mammography at the incident round has improved the rate of screen-detected breast cancer in Wales.

AIM: To investigate whether pre-invasive and invasive cancer detection rates were improved in Wales after the introduction of two views at incident screens. METHODS: The records of women attending follow-up screening for 2 years before and 2 years after the introduction of two-view incident screening were analysed. Cancer detection rates were compared before and after introduction of two view screening. RESULTS: At the incident round 98,752 women had one and 95,464 had two views. Five hundred and fifty-five cancers were detected with one view and 744 with two, an increased detection rate from 5.6 to 7.8 cancers per 1000 women screened (p=0.01). Two hundred and thirty-nine small cancers were detected with one view and 323 with two, increasing the detection rate from 2.4 to 3.4 per 1000 women screened (p=0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Two-view mammography at incident rounds detects more cancers and more favourable prognosis small cancers than single-view mammograms.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2004

A case-control study to estimate the impact on breast cancer death of the breast screening programme in Wales.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate the effect of service screening, as provided by the NHS breast screening programme, on breast cancer mortality in Wales. Furthermore, we wished to ascertain whether a reduction in breast cancer mortality consistent with that observed in the randomised screening trials was being achieved. SETTING: The NHS Breast Screening Programme in Wales, managed by Breast Test Wales, with headquarters in Cardiff. METHODS: A case-control study design with 1:2 matching. The cases were deaths from breast cancer in women aged 50-75 years at diagnosis who were diagnosed after the instigation of screening in 1991 and who died after 1998. The controls were women who had not died of breast cancer or any other condition during the study period. One was from the same GP practice and the other from a different GP practice within the same district, matched by year of birth. RESULTS: Based on 419 cases, the odds ratio for risk of death from breast cancer for women who have attended at least one routine screen compared to those never screened was 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.47-0.82, p=0.001). After excluding cases diagnosed prior to 1995 and adjusting for self-selection bias, the estimated mortality reduction was 25% (odds ratio=0.75, 95% CI 0.49-1.14, p=0.09). CONCLUSION: The Breast Test Wales screening programme is achieving a reduction in breast cancer mortality of 25% in women attending for screening, which is consistent with the results of the randomized controlled trials of mammographic screening.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

The relevance of reported symptoms in a breast screening programme.

AIM: Although the National Health Service (NHS) Breast Screening Programme is aimed at asymptomatic women, inevitably patients attending screening report symptoms. The study aim was to assess the usefulness of recall based on clinical symptoms. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information on breast symptoms is recorded at screening and radiologists can make recall decisions based on mammography and symptom history. We identified 1394 women with significant symptoms, between 1991 and 1996. The majority (54%) complained of a lump, 21% had breast distortion, 18% breast pain alone and 6% reported nipple discharge. RESULTS: Of the 1394 women, 262 were recalled because of mammographic suspicion and of these, 45% had breast cancer. The other 1132 women had symptoms and benign mammograms and 44% of these were recalled. Seven breast cancers were diagnosed; all had complained of a breast lump. In two the cancer would have been seen on two-view mammography. Of 638 not recalled, five women went on to develop an interval cancer. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that collecting details on symptoms is useful given the high rate of breast cancer in those with mammographic abnormality. When mammography is benign, however, the low rate of cancer detection means recall should be selective based on only the most relevant symptoms.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2001

Results from 10 years of breast screening in Wales.

OBJECTIVE: To present results from 10 years of breast screening in Wales, including rates of interval cancers. SETTING: All women aged 50-64 years in Wales; approximately 250,000 in each screening round. METHODS: Breast Test Wales (BTW) began mammographic screening in 1989 as part of the National Breast Screening Programme. Two view mammography was introduced at the inception of the Welsh programme for all prevalent screens. Single view mammography was subsequently performed for incident screens. Interval cancers were identified by matching details from the BTW administrative screening database with the BTW database of all incident breast cancers for residents in Wales. RESULTS: For the first and second round prevalent screens, the cancer detection rate was 8.6 per 1000 and 7.4 per 1000 screened, respectively. The interval cancer rates following round one were 4.9 per 10,000 in the first 12 months, 9.0 per 10,000 between 12 and 24 months, and 11.6 per 10,000 between 24 and 36 months after screening. For the second round incident screens the detection rate was 4.6 per 1000 and the standardised detection ratio was 0.89, but the interval cancer rates in the first year after incident screens were not statistically different from those following prevalent screens. There was no change in the proportion of invasive breast cancers which were < 15 mm in diameter, or in the grades of invasive cancer between the first and second rounds, prevalent or incident screens. CONCLUSIONS: Breast Test Wales has achieved the standards set by the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Taking two views at the prevalent screen gave high sensitivity and may have resulted in the low standardised detection ratio at subsequent incident screens.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed2000

Randomized trial of a specialist genetic assessment service for familial breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Because of the growing demand for genetic assessment, there is an urgent need for information about what services are appropriate for women with a family history of breast cancer. Our purpose was to compare the psychologic impact and costs of a multidisciplinary genetic and surgical assessment service with those of current service provisions. METHODS: We carried out a prospective randomized trial of surgical consultation with (the trial group) and without (the control group) genetic assessment in 1000 women with a family history of breast cancer. All P: values are from two-sided tests. RESULTS: Although statistically significantly greater improvement in knowledge about breast cancer was found in the trial group (P: =.05), differences between groups in other psychologic outcomes were not statistically significant. Women in both groups experienced statistically significant reductions in anxiety and found attending the clinics to be highly satisfying. An initial specialist genetic assessment cost pound 14.27 (U.S. $22.55) more than a consultation with a breast surgeon. Counseling and genetic testing of affected relatives, plus subsequent testing of family members of affected relatives identified as mutation carriers, raised the total extra direct and indirect costs per woman in the trial group to pound 60.98 (U.S. $96.35) over costs for the control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: There may be little benefit in providing specialist genetics services to all women with a family history of breast cancer. Further investigation of factors that may mediate the impact of genetic assessment is in progress and may reveal subgroups of women who would benefit from specialist genetics services.

Adult↗