Study: 1 in 3 breast cancer patients overtreated

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Study: 1 in 3 breast cancer patients overtreated stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

MARIA CHENG | 07/ 9/09 11:49 PM | AP

What's Your Reaction?

LONDON — One in three breast cancer patients identified in public screening programs may be treated unnecessarily, a new study says. Karsten Jorgensen and Peter Gotzsche of the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen analyzed breast cancer trends at least seven years before and after government-run screening programs for breast cancer started in parts of Australia, Britain, Canada, Norway and Sweden.

The research was published Friday in the BMJ, formerly known as the British Medical Journal. Jorgensen and Gotzsche did not cite any funding for their study.

Once screening programs began, more cases of breast cancer were inevitably picked up, the study showed. If a screening program is working, there should also be a drop in the number of advanced cancer cases detected in older women, since their cancers should theoretically have been caught earlier when they were screened.

However, Jorgensen and Gotzsche found the national breast cancer screening systems, which usually test women aged between 50 and 69, simply reported thousands more cases than previously identified.

Overall, Jorgensen and Gotzsche found that one third of the women identified as having breast cancer didn't actually need to be treated.

Some cancers never cause symptoms or death, and can grow too slowly to ever affect patients. As it is impossible to distinguish between those and deadly cancers, any identified cancer is treated. But the treatments can have harmful side-effects and be psychologically scarring.

"This information needs to get to women so they can make an informed choice," Jorgensen said. "There is a significant harm in making women cancer patients without good reason."

Jorgensen said that for years, women were urged to undergo breast cancer screening without them being informed of the risks involved, such as having to endure unnecessary treatment if a cancer was identified, even if it might never threaten their health.

Story continues below
advertisement

Doctors and patients have long debated the merits of prostate cancer screening out of similar concerns that it overdiagnoses patients. A study in the Netherlands found that as many as two out of every five men whose prostate cancer was caught through a screening test had tumors too slow-growing to ever be a threat.

"Mammography is one of medicine's 'close calls,' ... where different people in the same situation might reasonably make different choices," wrote H. Gilbert Welch of VA Outcomes Group and the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Research, in an accompanying editorial in the BMJ. "Mammography undoubtedly helps some women but hurts others."

Experts said overtreatment occurs wherever there is widespread cancer screening, including the U.S.

Britain's national health system recently ditched its pamphlet inviting women to get screened for breast cancer, after critics complained it did not explain the overtreatment problem.

Laura Bell of Cancer Research UK said Britain's breast cancer screening program was partly responsible for the country's reduced breast cancer cases.

"We still urge women to go for screening when invited," she said, though she acknowledged it was crucial for women to be informed of the potential benefits and harms of screening.

___

On the Net:

http://www.bmj.com

LONDON — One in three breast cancer patients identified in public screening programs may be treated unnecessarily, a new study says. Karsten Jorgensen and Peter Gotzsche of the Nordic Cochrane C...
LONDON — One in three breast cancer patients identified in public screening programs may be treated unnecessarily, a new study says. Karsten Jorgensen and Peter Gotzsche of the Nordic Cochrane C...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
29
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

I had lost my dear Aunt Marie because of Breast Cancer in 1986. Since then there has not been a single day when I had not lit a candle for her. My mom and I take every precautionary measure to prevent any chance of suffering from Brest Cancer.

I have searched quite a lot of articles on Breast Cancer. The one sight that caught my attention was http://www.caring.com/breast-cancer. It provides a-z information about Breast Cancer.

It is so difficult to identify the cancer at the early stages. And yes, I agree with what most of you have said that the treatments are painful (especially the Chemotherapy) and expensive as well.

Regards,
Angela

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:45 AM on 07/28/2009
- oakley9 I'm a Fan of oakley9 20 fans permalink

What we need is a new non invasive screening and testing procedure that is more reliable. Mammograms are the worst. they don't show or prove anything. they are a huge moneymaker though.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:36 AM on 07/15/2009
- oakley9 I'm a Fan of oakley9 20 fans permalink

For-profit health care will always produce this type of abuse. I am not surprised at this news.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 PM on 07/13/2009
- shearm I'm a Fan of shearm 2 fans permalink

New Revised Title: 1 in 3 patients over treated.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:23 AM on 07/10/2009

This is such an outrage. I have lost three friends in the last two years who died from aggressive treatment of breast cancer, not cancer itself. I'm glad people are becoming aware of the cancer money machine. Unfortunately too late for some women.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

If someone needs aggressive treatment for cancer then the cancer is aggressive. I know it is a painfull and private subject but if you can be more specific. Was it metastasized? What type of cancer was it? Where was it located? What stage was it?

These are important factors. Telling women not to be screened is not the way to go. Your position could steer someone away and cause them to lose their life. Early detection of cancer is the best method of treatment.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:26 AM on 07/10/2009
- euthman I'm a Fan of euthman 44 fans permalink
photo

Iatrogenic deaths from breast cancer treatment are rare these days, chemotherapy being so much milder than in decades past. Your experience suggests that either you did not get the whole story, or there is some major problem with the specific decisions made about your friends.

Ed Uthman, MD
Pathologist

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:14 AM on 07/13/2009
- roseau I'm a Fan of roseau 10 fans permalink

I wonder if it were less lucrative to cancer clinics and drug companies, oncologists and imaging centers would we perhaps see more conservative treatment? Hmmm.
it's kind of like when I had my kids and the hospitals were so keen to have me need more and more screenings, tests...no­ne of which are proven to do anything but negatively impact the birth process. But they needed to generate revenue to pay for the new birthing suites and since my insurance would pay for 2 nights BOY did they want me to be there 2 nights. So my baby could get more exposure to rotavirus and staph?! Please. It's all about the dolares.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 PM on 07/09/2009
- euthman I'm a Fan of euthman 44 fans permalink
photo

The best way to minimize the potential for this type of abuse, I think, is simply to pass laws forbidding doctors from referring patients to surgery centers and imaging centers they own. The so-called Stark Laws are so full of loopholes that they present no barrier at all to such self-referrals.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:20 AM on 07/13/2009
photo

P.rogressi­ves may want reform but before we revamp our system we better put into place a system that works. One that is not based on methods other use but one that works for America. One that protects our people. One that takes a proactive look at our health. I am also very concerned as I am disabled. I have had 9 surgeries in 2 years. Now that I am on government run health care I have been removed from medication that I was taking because it is not on the approved list of medication. This medication is the number one medication for my condition in the private world. I cannot see any of the surgeons that worked on me. I have to drive 2.5 hours to see doctors that will take my government insurance. Under private health care I had no problems with my care. I know we need change but we need the right change.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:13 PM on 07/09/2009
- sunnybunny I'm a Fan of sunnybunny 16 fans permalink
photo

Is there more than one medicaid option available for you in your area? It may have changed over the years. It has been a while for me since I have needed medical care, but when I was having babies etc. and got medicaid there was more than one plan available and they covered different things(PHP or regular medicaid). I did a little research and was able to find a plan that met my needs for my situation. I had to make some compromises and pay for some things myself, but it was within reason and was able to get exactly what I wanted and needed. This might help you.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:41 AM on 07/10/2009
- MyrtleJune I'm a Fan of MyrtleJune 52 fans permalink

Well, since health care has become an "Industry" someone has to pump up the profits.

Yes I MEAN that too. Our small city had a real outbreak of cancer among just the people I work with just after we got a "cancer treatment center". My mother died of breast cancer in 1977 and it was the chemo that killed her actually. With alllllllll runs and climbs and walks I do not see ONE thing different in the "conquering" of cancer. I'm sorry, but there is something wrong with this picture. I applaud the courage it takes for SOMEONE to step forward and point out the over treatment.

Yes, I mean that too. :-|

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:12 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

1977 was the dark ages for cancer treatment. I am sorry for your mother but not being proactive with breast cancer is not a positive action.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 PM on 07/09/2009
- MyrtleJune I'm a Fan of MyrtleJune 52 fans permalink

Well then, why are people still dying from it? The TRUTH is no one knows what causes it becasue if they did it wouldn't exist. And, to overtreat those or to create such a panic in women's lives is still rather dark age-ish to me.

I mean come on! Its like people are celebrating breast cancer! Pink this and that and pink ribbons so that breast cancer breast cancer is in a woman's mind at all times. It is that fear of getting it that just might possibly be part of the CAUSE of it or at least make it harder to fight. No. I absolutly believe women are over treated and go through hell, a hell that probably does more damage to the body than helps fight breast cancer. Were this not so heavily marketed I might not feel this way. That still doesn't discount this study that ONE in three women are over treated. And, most likely that overtreatment reduces their future chances of their body fighting back for this or something else.

I don't know what happened to "first do no harm". All this crazy medical marketing and feel-good money collecting is just over the top. And I don't think all the monies collected from these campaigns does ONE thing to stop breast cancer. If it did, why we'd have it solved by now!

Being proactive is not over treating in any way. Being profit driven is.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 PM on 07/09/2009
- wordvarc I'm a Fan of wordvarc 31 fans permalink

Let Dr. Frist decide what is 'over-treatment' by reviewing patient videos...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 PM on 07/09/2009
- Talossa I'm a Fan of Talossa 23 fans permalink
photo

Study: 1 in 3 breast cancer stories feature soft-core porn shots.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:08 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

We find less cancer by a percentage but we are able to detect early precancers and put markers in women to watch them and make sure they do not turn evil. We take a proactive view on saving our women's lives. My wife is a high risk person and has markers. She is 36. If she was in Europe she would not have any knowledge of this possible evil.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:07 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

This blog needs to be on front and center on page one. This is somewhat biased as it does not explain our reasoning why we screen so early but the left needs to understand the European testing methods are not like ours and that is one reason our costs are more.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 PM on 07/09/2009

In England mammograms don't start till age 50 because of the belief that the screening with the radiation involved can actually cause Breast cancer over years. What's up with that? Why do American's start so young? Sure there are early cases in age but is it all about money in this country? Maybe some truth to that. I don't put anything past the medical insurance companies to be behind the pushing of mammograms at such a young age of 40. Who really knows?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:20 PM on 07/09/2009
photo

The reason they do not screen in Europe so early is because they are trying to cut costs with testing just like what our people in congress are about to do with our health care. The reason our insurance companies want you to screen early is it is proactive to treat someone young and stop them from getting cancer.

This is one of the main reasons I am not for the current reforms in health care with our government taking over our health care.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:02 PM on 07/09/2009
- sunnybunny I'm a Fan of sunnybunny 16 fans permalink
photo

Many people would also CHOOSE not to have mammograms or aggressive treatment if they did the research and were not intimidated by scare tactics. It should all balance out on costs if all things are considered

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 07/10/2009

Could we please, for once, have an article about breast cancer that doesn't include photos of breasts? Really, we know where breast cancer occurs. How about a woman's face for once? A slide of cancer cells? Pictures of drugs?
No. It's always a breast in a sexualized light OR it's stock footage of some woman getting a mammogram--not exactly a good inducement for women who are reluctant to get one.
They don't show intestines for colon cancer, they don't show a guy getting a prostate exame for prostate cancer.
Sexualized health care. Please fix this and have a different picture.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:56 PM on 07/09/2009
- fcsakes I'm a Fan of fcsakes 83 fans permalink
photo

Excellent point!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 PM on 07/09/2009
- Talossa I'm a Fan of Talossa 23 fans permalink
photo

Is it a cynical way to get men to read the stories?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:39 PM on 07/09/2009
- roseau I'm a Fan of roseau 10 fans permalink

Whatever works. Nothing wrong with bubbies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:36 PM on 07/09/2009
- beck I'm a Fan of beck 3 fans permalink

I'm glad they don't show the prostate exam.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:41 PM on 07/09/2009
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect