0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Editorial |

Rethinking the Standard for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treatment

Laura Esserman, MD, MBA1; Christina Yau, PhD1
[+] Author Affiliations
1Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California
JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(7):881-883. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2607.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Extract

The original goal of mammographic screening was to identify invasive cancers at the earliest stage, because of the superior prognosis of stage I cancers. Prior to the advent of screening, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) made up approximately 3% of breast cancers detected. As we pushed to find smaller and smaller cancers, and targeted calcifications instead of just masses, we began to identify DCIS more frequently. Now DCIS accounts for approximately 20% to 25% of screen-detected breast cancers. The cells that make up DCIS look like invasive cancer both pathologically and molecularly, and therefore the presumption was made that these lesions were the precursors of cancer and that early removal and treatment would reduce cancer incidence and mortality. However, long-term epidemiology studies have demonstrated that the removal of 50 000 to 60 000 DCIS lesions annually has not been accompanied by a reduction in the incidence of invasive breast cancers.1 This is in contrast to the experience with removal of colonic polyps and intraepithelial neoplasia lesions of the cervix, in which the removal of precursor lesions has led to a decrease in the incidence of colon and cervical cancer, respectively.2 We now know that breast cancer encompasses a range of behaviors, from aggressive to indolent; the latter are more likely to surface with screening.3 The analysis of Narod et al4 fuels a growing concern that we should rethink our strategy for the detection and treatment of DCIS.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment
Another blow to routine mammogram screening
Posted on August 21, 2015
James Kolter, M.D.
Senior Attending, Paoli Hospital
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
The decision a woman should make about accepting mammogram screening requires a thoughtful risk/benefit analysis. Unfortunately, women usually are handed a request slip and without thinking, subject themselves to unnecessary radiation for a test that may create more harm than good. The discovery of DCIS only heightens a woman's anxiety and often leads to over treatment programs. Our study, available at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0128895 , demonstrates that our profession uses an inflated risk assessment from SEER data. Would a woman choose this test if she knew the risk is lower than touted and the benefits less than advocated? We should educate our patients and find out!
Many progestins, not progesterone, increase the risk of breast cancer
Posted on August 28, 2015
Henry Lindner, MD
Private Practice
Conflict of Interest: None Declared
The authors' otherwise excellent commentary is marred by their advice to avoid progesterone-containing HRT regimens in menopause. Perhaps they meant to say \"progestins'\". Progesterone, unlike many progestins, has not been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer diagnosis. Progesterone has several known anti-estrogen actions in the breast, and high-dose progesterone should be studied as a possible preventative measure. It would not have the negative health and quality-of-life effects of current anti-estrogen treatments. A good review of the evidence regarding progesterone and breast cancer can be found here:

Campagnoli C, Clavel-Chapelon F, Kaaks R, Peris C, Berrino F. Progestins and progesterone in hormone replacement therapy and the risk of breast cancer. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2005 Jul;96(2):95-108.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

16,518 Views
0 Citations
×

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
JAMAevidence.com

Care at the Close of Life: Evidence and Experience
Radiation Therapy

The Rational Clinical Examination: Evidence-Based Clinical Diagnosis
Evidence Summary and Review 3

brightcove.createExperiences();