Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T19:19:07.234Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Survival from Localized Breast Cancer: Variability Across Trials and Registries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Sidney Klawansky ,
Catherine Berkey ,
Nirav Shah ,
Frederick Mosteller  and
Thomas C. Chalmers
Sidney Klawansky
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Catherine Berkey
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Nirav Shah
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Frederick Mosteller
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Thomas C. Chalmers
Affiliation:
Harvard School of Public Health
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Age-specific (<50, 50–69 years) 10-year survival proportions in four European trials for node-negative, Stage I and II breast cancer patients differ significantly. These patients, identified as having the same stage as localized-breast cancer patients in the End Results Registry of the U.S. National Cancer Institute, had pooled survival proportions for the two age groups (0.713, 0.579) close to those of the registry (0.713, 0.607).

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , Fall 1993 , pp. 539 - 553
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Cancer Research Campaign Working Party. Cancer search campaign (King’s/Cambridge) trial for early breast cancer. Lancet, 1980, 2, 55–60.Google Scholar
2.CASS Principal Investigators and Their Associates. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS): A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1985, 3, 114–28.Google Scholar
3.Cuzick, J., Stewart, H., Peto, R., et al. Overview of randomized trials of post-operative adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer. Cancer Treatment Reports, 1987, 71, 15–29.Google ScholarPubMed
4.DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N.Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clinical Trials, 1986, 7, 177–88.Google Scholar
5.DeSchyrver, A.The Stockholm breast cancer trial: Preliminary report of a randomized study concerning the value of pre-operative and post-operative radiotherapy in operable disease. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 1976,1, 601–09.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Easson, E. C. Post-operative radiotherapy in breast cancer. In Forrest, A. P. M. & Kunkler, P. B. (eds.), Prognostic factors in breast cancer, Edinburgh: ES Livingston, 1968, 118–27.Google Scholar
7.Gersh, B. J., Kronmal, R. A., Schaff, H. V., et al. Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and medical therapy in patients 65 years of age or older: A nonrandomized study from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Registry. New England Journal of Medicine, 1985, 313, 217–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Harmer, M. H. TNM classification of malignant tumors. International Union Against Cancer, 1982, 47–53.Google Scholar
9.Harris, E. K., & Albert, A.Survivorship analysis for clinical studies. Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1981, 30–34.Google Scholar
10.Hlatky, M. A., Califf, R. M., Harrell, F. E. et al. Comparison of predictions based on observational data with the results of randomized controlled clinical trials of coronary artery bypass surgery. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 1988, 11, 237–45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Host, H., & Brennhovd, I. O.Combined surgery and radiation therapy versus surgery alone in primary mammary carcinoma. Ada Radiologica: Therapy, Physics, Biology, 1975, 14, 25–32.Google ScholarPubMed
12.Host, H., & Brennhovd, I. O.The effect of post-operative radiotherapy in breast cancer. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 1972, 2, 1061–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Laird, N., & Mosteller, F.Some statistical methods for combining experimental results. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1990, 6, 5–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Lythgoe, J. P., & Palmer, M. K.Manchester regional breast study: Five and ten year results. British Journal of Surgery, 1982, 69, 693–96.Google Scholar
15.Lythgoe, J. P., & Swincell, R.Manchester regional breast study, preliminary results. Lancet, 1978, 1, 744–47.Google Scholar
16.Palmer, M. K., & Ribeiro, C. G.Thirty-four year follow-up of patients with breast cancer in a clinical trial of post-operative breast cancer. British Medical Journal, 1985, 291, 1088–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Paterson, R.Breast cancer: A report of two clinical trials. Journal of the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, 1962, 7, 248–54.Google Scholar
18.Paterson, R.Principles of random selection. Journal of the Faculty of Radiology, 1958, 9, 80–83.Google Scholar
19.Paterson, R., & Russell, M. H.Breast cancer: Evaluation of post-operative radiotherapy. Journal of the Faculty of Radiology, 1959, 10, 175–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Ribeiro, G. C. Thirty years experience with breast cancer clinical trials at the Christie Hospital in Manchester. In Scheurlen, H. R., Weckesser, G., & Armbruster, I. (eds.), Clinical trials in early breast cancer. Berlin: Springer-Verlag 1979: 71–74.Google Scholar
21.Swanson, G. M., & Brennan, M. J.Cancer incidence and mortality in metropolitan Detroit, 1973–1977. Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results: Incidence and mortality data. National Cancer Institute Monograph, 1981, 57, 219–98.Google Scholar
22.Wallgren, A. A controlled study: Pre-operative versus post-operative irradiation. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 1977, 1167–69.Google Scholar