Third of breast cancer 'harmless'

[Hannah Bell]

One in three breast cancers detected by mammogram screening may actually be harmless, a study has suggested.

Data from five countries, including the UK, suggest some women may have had unnecessary treatment for cancers that were unlikely to kill them or spread.

Writing in the British Medical Journal (BMJ), they said: "Screening for cancer may lead to earlier detection of lethal cancers but also detects harmless ones that will not cause death or symptoms.

"The detection of such cancers, which would not have been identified clinically in someone's remaining lifetime, is called over-diagnosis and can only be harmful to those who experience it."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8143564.stm


This isn't actually new news. There's been other research with the same conclusion. Same with prostate.

[Horse with no Name]

1. Oh Boy

Not sure how I feel about this. For some reason it gives me some unease that this will allow physicians to ignore breast cancer.

[Sanity Claws]

2. I wonder if it is dependent upon age

I read the article but didn't see any reference to age. I wonder whether the nonlethal cancers are more prevalent in post-menopausal women. I think the higher estrogen levels in younger women may feed the cancer and make them lethal.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. But We Don't (Yet) Know Which Tumor is Which

So treating all of them leads to a better outcome than treating none of them. In the case of prostate cancer, I believe that it's not been shown that prostatectomy (prostate removal) helps improve outcome in men over 55, which are the vast bulk of cases.

[Horse with no Name]

4. Exactly. And this study will be used by insurance companies to deny treatment

to women that they feel "might" have the harmless tumor. Russian roulette.

[LeftishBrit]

6. Yes - my concern too.

[sybylla]

7. Not true

When my mom dealt with breast cancer as detected by regular mammogram screenings, they could tell a great deal from the biopsy. There are over 250 known types of breast cancer cells and they had no trouble pinpointing my mothers and knowing how it generally behaves, the kinds of treatment required and more.

What we may not know, precisely, is which of these cancers can be ignored or proscribed a milder form of treatment.

A bigger problem is that if the word cancer appears in anyone's medical chart, they risk losing their insurance, even if it's not a dangerous cancer or one likely to recur.

[pecwae]

5. I'm convinced that I was overtreated initially.

My first BC was DCIS which is confined to the ducts. It has the potential to migrate, but from all I've read is not harmful in situ. I was treated surgically, then with rads to 'mop up'. Exactly two years later IDC was diagnosed entailing more surgery and chemo.

I wish I had researched a lot more the first time around. I would have opted for watchful waiting and perhaps have spared myself slash, burn and poison.

[backscatter712]

8. Better not let the insurance companies look at this...

You know they'll use this an an excuse to deny treatment.

[HOLOS]

9. Medical Integrity=another OXYMORON!!

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.