» Articles » PMID: 38958807

Routine Clinical Breast Examination Is a Low-Yield Practice Among Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer

Overview
Journal Ann Surg Oncol
Publisher Springer
Specialty Oncology
Date 2024 Jul 3
PMID 38958807
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: For women at increased risk of breast cancer, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend clinical encounters every 6-12 months. While screening mammography has corresponded with a relative risk reduction in breast cancer mortality of approximately 20%, evidence validating clinical breast examination (CBE) as an efficacious screening modality is deficient. Our study aimed to assess the conventional merit of regular CBE for breast cancer detection among individuals at increased risk of breast cancer development.

Methods: Women > 18 years with documented high-risk encounters at Corewell Health West from 1 January 2018 to 31 December 22 were retrospectively reviewed. High-risk criteria included genetic predisposition, 5-year (> 1.7%) or lifetime (> 20%) Tyrer-Cuzick and/or Gail Model risk estimations, thoracic radiotherapy before age 30 years, lobular carcinoma in-situ, or atypical hyperplasia. Patients with a history of breast cancer or bilateral prophylactic mastectomy prior to 2018 were excluded.

Results: Of the 9171 cumulative high-risk encounters among 2493 women, only one breast cancer was detected by CBE. CBE resulted in 1 (0.04%) cancer diagnosis compared with 30 (1.2%) detected on screening imaging and 10 (0.4%) self-reported. Of the 30 image-detected cancers, 28 (93.3%) had no detectable clinical findings at the time of preoperative consultation. Self-reported and CBE-detected cancers were more likely to be of higher clinical stage compared with imaging-detected malignancies.

Conclusions: The role of routine CBE as a cancer detection modality in the high-risk patient population appears to be limited. Telemedicine can be offered to individuals who have completed screening imaging but are unable to commit and/or are inconvenienced by in-person high-risk breast cancer assessments.

References
1.
Siegel R, Miller K, Fuchs H, Jemal A . Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022; 72(1):7-33. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21708. View

2.
Miller K, Nogueira L, Devasia T, Mariotto A, Yabroff K, Jemal A . Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022; 72(5):409-436. DOI: 10.3322/caac.21731. View

3.
Gotzsche P, Jorgensen K . Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (6):CD001877. PMC: 6464778. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub5. View

4.
Tabar L, Dean P, Chen T, Yen A, Chen S, Fann J . The incidence of fatal breast cancer measures the increased effectiveness of therapy in women participating in mammography screening. Cancer. 2018; 125(4):515-523. PMC: 6588008. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31840. View

5.
Marmot M, Altman D, Cameron D, Dewar J, Thompson S, Wilcox M . The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer. 2013; 108(11):2205-40. PMC: 3693450. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.177. View