Breast Neoplasms: Sancho-Garnier H

Shyyan R, Sener SF, Anderson BO, Garrote LM, Hortobágyi GN, Ibarra JA, Ljung BM, Sancho-Garnier H, Stalsberg H, Anonymous00018. · Department of Surgery, Lviv Regional Cancer Center, Lviv, Ukraine. · Cancer. · Pubmed #18837018 No free full text.

Abstract: A key determinant of breast cancer outcome in any population is the degree to which newly detected cancers can be diagnosed correctly so that therapy can be selected properly and provided in a timely fashion. A multidisciplinary panel of experts reviewed diagnosis guideline tables and discussed core implementation issues and process indicators based on the resource stratification guidelines. Issues were then summarized in the context of 1) clinical assessment, 2) diagnostic breast imaging, 3) tissue sampling, 4) surgical pathology, 5) laboratory tests and metastatic imaging, and 6) the healthcare system. Patient history provides important information for the clinical assessment of breast and comorbid disease that may influence therapy choices. Focused clinical breast examination and complete physical examination provide guidance on the extent of disease, the presence of metastatic disease, and the ability to tolerate aggressive therapeutic regimens. Breast imaging improves preoperative diagnostic assessment and also permits image-guided needle sampling. Diagnostic mammography was not considered mandatory in low- and middle-income countries when resources are lacking. Needle biopsy is preferred to surgical excision for the initial diagnosis of suspicious breast lesions, unless resources are unavailable. Mastectomy should never be used as a method of tissue diagnosis. The availability of predictive tumor markers, especially estrogen receptor testing, is critical when endocrine therapies are available; quality assessment of immunohistochemistry testing is important to avoid false-negative results. Incremental allocation of resources can help address economic disparities and help ensure equity in access to timely diagnosis.

Anderson BO, Yip CH, Ramsey SD, Bengoa R, Braun S, Fitch M, Groot M, Sancho-Garnier H, Tsu VD, Anonymous00018. · Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, 98195, USA. · Breast J. · Pubmed #16430399 No free full text.

Abstract: As the largest cancer killer of women around the globe, breast cancer adversely impacts countries at all levels of economic development. Despite major advances in the early detection, diagnosis, and treatment of breast cancer, health care ministries face multitiered challenges to create and support health care programs that can improve breast cancer outcomes. In addition to the financial and organizational problems inherent in any health care system, breast health programs are hindered by a lack of recognition of cancer as a public health priority, trained health care personnel shortages and migration, public and health care provider educational deficits, and social barriers that impede patient entry into early detection and cancer treatment programs. No perfect health care system exists, even in the wealthiest countries. Based on inevitable economic and practical constraints, all health care systems are compelled to make trade-offs among four factors: access to care, scope of service, quality of care, and cost containment. Given these trade-offs, guidelines can define stratified approaches by which economically realistic incremental improvements can be sequentially implemented within the context of resource constraints to improve breast health care. Disease-specific "vertical" programs warrant "horizontal" integration with existing health care systems in limited-resource countries. The Breast Health Global Initiative (BHGI) Health Care Systems and Public Policy Panel defined a stratified framework outlining recommended breast health care interventions for each of four incremental levels of resources (basic, limited, enhanced, and maximal). Reallocation of existing resources and integration of a breast health care program with existing programs and infrastructure can potentially improve outcomes in a cost-sensitive manner. This adaptable framework can be used as a tool by policymakers for program planning and research design to make best use of available resources to improve breast health care in a given limited-resource setting.

Schraub S, Sancho-Garnier H, Velten M. · Laboratoire d'épidémiologie et de santé publique, faculté de médecine, université Louis-Pasteur, 11, rue Humann, 67085 Strasbourg cedex, France. · Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique. · Pubmed #19345029 No free full text.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The possibility that life events, personality or depression can be considered risk factors for cancer has been of great interest among the lay public and doctors. METHODS: A critical review of different publications of meta-analyses, case-control studies and cohort studies investigating a possible relation between the onset of cancer and life events, personality disorders or depression is presented. Many studies have methodological limitations with possible bias, which may explain controversial results. We selected 32 studies from which conclusions can be drawn with the least amount of bias. RESULTS: Eighteen out of 32 publications whose methodology permits unbiased interpretation show no link between psychological factors and the risk of cancer. Six publications show a significant link only in one or several subgroups and four surveys, three of which were published by the same author, show an inverse relation in gynecological cancers. As for life events and breast cancer, the results are slightly in favor of a positive relation in four studies; four others showed no relation and one argues in favor of an inverse risk, which means a protective effect for this cancer. For life events and other cancers, studies show no relation, with the possible exception of cancers in women where endogenous estrogens can play a role (colon and endometrial cancers), where there is an inverse relation. No studies showed a significant relation between personality features and the risk of cancer. The studies of a possible relation between depression and cancer are controversial and no conclusion can be drawn. CONCLUSION: It cannot be confidently concluded that life events, personality features or depression play a role in the onset of cancer.

Zapka JG, Geller BM, Bulliard JL, Fracheboud J, Sancho-Garnier H, Ballard-Barbash R, Anonymous00730. · University of Massachusetts Medical School, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA 01655, USA. · Patient Educ Couns. · Pubmed #16962910 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To profile and compare the content and presentation of written communications related to informed decision-making about mammography. METHODS: Materials from 16 screening programs organized at the national or regional level were analyzed according to five major information domains suggested by the international literature. RESULTS: A majority of countries provided information on the program (interval, cost and quality). There was considerable variability in comprehensiveness of elements in the domains, e.g., test characteristics (false positive/negative) and pros and cons of screening. The majority noted the likelihood of recall for further tests, few commented on the risks of additional tests or finding unimportant tumors. The audit also found variation in presentation (words and pictures). CONCLUSIONS: Presentation of comprehensive, but balanced information on screening benefits and risks is complex and daunting. Issues such as framing effects, coupled with debate about screening efficacy are challenging to the design of effective information tools. The objective of increasing screening prevalence at the population level must be balanced with objectively presenting complete and clear information. Additional research is needed on how information (and mode of presentation) impact screening decisions. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Public health officials need to articulate their objectives and review written communication according to important decision-making domains.

Sancho-Garnier H. · CRCLCC Val d'Aurelle-Paul-Lamarque, Montpellier, France. · Gynecol Obstet Fertil. · Pubmed #15450268 No free full text.

This publication has no abstract.

Klabunde CN, Sancho-Garnier H, Taplin S, Thoresen S, Ohuchi N, Ballard-Barbash R, Anonymous00157. · National Cancer Institute, Health Services and Economics Branch, Bethesda, MD 20892-7344, USA. · Int J Qual Health Care. · Pubmed #12515331 links to  free full text

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To describe the quality assurance activities related to follow-up evaluation of abnormal screening mammograms and subsequent initial treatment of women determined to have breast cancer for the screening programs represented in the International Breast Cancer Screening Network (IBSN). DESIGN: Analysis of data from a survey that included questions about screening program policies, standards, and procedures for follow-up of women with abnormal mammograms, as well as the data and measures that programs use to assess the adequacy of follow-up and initial treatment. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: IBSN representatives in 23 countries completed a comprehensive questionnaire between May and December 1998. RESULTS: Two-thirds of IBSN countries reported that they have a written policy or guidelines for follow-up of an abnormal mammogram; 64% require accreditation of the cytology or pathology laboratories that analyze breast specimens, or subject pathology laboratories to external audits. Of the 22 activities and measures related to quality of follow-up and initial treatment that we examined, all countries had in place at least half of them, although countries were more likely to have implemented activities and measures related to data collection and evaluation than to processes of care. CONCLUSIONS: Population-based screening mammography programs cannot achieve the goal of reducing breast cancer mortality if women with abnormal mammograms do not receive appropriate, timely follow-up and initial treatment. This study shows that IBSN countries vary in their implementation of procedures and measures to assure the quality of follow-up and initial treatment for women with abnormal screening mammograms. There is more emphasis on collecting and evaluating data than establishing mechanisms to ensure that the processes of care for follow-up and initial treatment are of high quality.

Klabunde CN, Sancho-Garnier H, Broeders M, Thoresen S, Rodrigues VJ, Ballard-Barbash R. · National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. · Int J Technol Assess Health Care. · Pubmed #11758297 No free full text.

Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To document the mammography data that are gathered by the organized screening programs participating in the International Breast Cancer Screening Network (IBSN), the nature of their procedures for data quality assurance, and the measures used to assess program performance and impact. METHODS: A detailed questionnaire covering multiple aspects of quality assurance in screening mammography was mailed to IBSN representatives in 23 countries. RESULTS: Countries collect a wealth of screening mammography data, much of it computerized. Most countries have designated staff for data quality assurance. All provide staff training, and most have documentation requirements for data collection. Nearly all have one or more procedures to maintain data confidentiality. Countries are heterogeneous in collecting and assessing data to monitor screening program performance and impact. CONCLUSIONS: Demonstrating that population-based screening mammography reduces breast cancer mortality requires collection of high-quality data on key aspects of the multi-step screening process. Assuring the quality of data collection systems for screening mammography programs is an important and evolving area for IBSN countries.