2026-05-31T17:58:23Zhttps://riuma.uma.es/rest/oai/request
oai:riuma.uma.es:10630/336392026-02-03T10:49:35Zcom_10630_2254col_10630_37953
RIUMA. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Málaga author Redondo-Bautista, Maximino author Funez, Rafael author Medina Cano, Francisco José author Rodrigo, Isabel author Acebal-Blanco, María Mercedes author Téllez-Santana, Teresa author Roldán Cardenete, María José author Hortas Nieto, María Luisa author Bellinvia, Ana author Pereda, Teresa author Domingo, Laia author Morales-Suárez-Varela, María Manuela author Sala, Maria author Rueda-Domínguez, Antonio 2024-09-27T09:48:09Z 2024-09-27T09:48:09Z 2012 Redondo M, Funez R, Medina-Cano F, Rodrigo I, Acebal M, Tellez T, Roldan MJ, Hortas ML, Bellinvia A, Pereda T, Domingo L, Morales-Suarez Varela M, Sala M, Rueda A. Detection methods predict differences in biology and survival in breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer. 2012 Dec 17;12:604. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-12-604. PMID: 23244222; PMCID: PMC3541058. https://hdl.handle.net/10630/33639 10.1186/1471-2407-12-604 Background: The aim of this study was to measure the biological characteristics involved in tumorigenesis and the progression of breast cancer in symptomatic and screen-detected carcinomas to identify possible differences. Methods: For this purpose, we evaluated clinical-pathological parameters and proliferative and apoptotic activities in a series of 130 symptomatic and 161 screen-detected tumors. Results: After adjustment for the smaller size of the screen-detected carcinomas compared with symptomatic cancers, those detected in the screening program presented longer disease-free survival (RR = 0.43, CI = 0.19-0.96) and had high estrogen and progesterone receptor concentrations more often than did symptomatic cancers (OR = 3.38, CI = 1.72-6.63 and OR = 3.44, CI = 1.94-6.10, respectively). Furthermore, the expression of bcl-2, a marker of good prognosis in breast cancer, was higher and HER2/neu expression was lower in screen-detected cancers than in symptomatic cancers (OR = 1.77, CI = 1.01-3.23 and OR = 0.64, CI = 0.40-0.98, respectively). However, when comparing prevalent vs incident screen-detected carcinomas, prevalent tumors were larger (OR = 2.84, CI = 1.05-7.69), were less likely to be HER2/neu positive (OR = 0.22, CI = 0.08-0.61) and presented lower Ki67 expression (OR = 0.36, CI = 0.17-0.77). In addition, incident tumors presented a shorter survival time than did prevalent ones (RR = 4.88, CI = 1.12-21.19). Conclusions: Incident carcinomas include a variety of screen-detected carcinomas that exhibit differences in biology and prognosis relative to prevalent carcinomas. The detection method is important and should be taken into account when making therapy decisions. eng Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional Mamas - Cáncer Detection methods predict differences in biology and survival in breast cancer patients journal article CjEuIEFjZXB0YW5kbyBlc3RhIGxpY2VuY2lhLCB1c3RlZCAoZWwgYXV0b3IvZXMgbyBlbCBwcm9waWV0YXJpby9zIGRlIGxvcyBkZXJlY2hvcyBkZSBhdXRvcikgZ2FyYW50aXphIGEgbGEgVW5pdmVyc2lkYWQgZGUgTcOhbGFnYSBlbCBkZXJlY2hvIG5vIGV4Y2x1c2l2byBkZSBhcmNoaXZhciwgcmVwcm9kdWNpciwgY29udmVydGlyIChjb21vIHNlIGRlZmluZSBtw6FzIGFiYWpvKSwgY29tdW5pY2FyIHkvbyBkaXN0cmlidWlyIHN1IGRvY3VtZW50byBtdW5kaWFsbWVudGUgZW4gZm9ybWF0byBlbGVjdHLDs25pY28uCgoyLiBUYW1iacOpbiBlc3TDoSBkZSBhY3VlcmRvIGNvbiBxdWUgbGEgVW5pdmVyc2lkYWQgZGUgTcOhbGFnYSBwdWVkYSBjb25zZXJ2YXIgbcOhcyBkZSB1bmEgY29waWEgZGUgZXN0ZSBkb2N1bWVudG8geSwgc2luIGFsdGVyYXIgc3UgY29udGVuaWRvLCBjb252ZXJ0aXJsbyBhIGN1YWxxdWllciBmb3JtYXRvIGRlIGZpY2hlcm8sIG1lZGlvIG8gc29wb3J0ZSwgcGFyYSBwcm9ww7NzaXRvcyBkZSBzZWd1cmlkYWQsIHByZXNlcnZhY2nDs24geSBhY2Nlc28uCgozLiBEZWNsYXJhIHF1ZSBlbCBkb2N1bWVudG8gZXMgdW4gdHJhYmFqbyBvcmlnaW5hbCBzdXlvIHkvbyBxdWUgdGllbmUgZWwgZGVyZWNobyBwYXJhIG90b3JnYXIgbG9zIGRlcmVjaG9zIGNvbnRlbmlkb3MgZW4gZXN0YSBsaWNlbmNpYS4gVGFtYmnDqW4gZGVjbGFyYSBxdWUgc3UgZG9jdW1lbnRvIG5vIGluZnJpbmdlLCBlbiB0YW50byBlbiBjdWFudG8gbGUgc2VhIHBvc2libGUgc2FiZXIsIGxvcyBkZXJlY2hvcyBkZSBhdXRvciBkZSBuaW5ndW5hIG90cmEgcGVyc29uYSBvIGVudGlkYWQuCgo0LiBTaSBlbCBkb2N1bWVudG8gY29udGllbmUgbWF0ZXJpYWxlcyBkZSBsb3MgY3VhbGVzIG5vIHRpZW5lIGxvcyBkZXJlY2hvcyBkZSBhdXRvciwgZGVjbGFyYSBxdWUgaGEgb2J0ZW5pZG8gZWwgcGVybWlzbyBzaW4gcmVzdHJpY2Npw7NuIGRlbCBwcm9waWV0YXJpbyBkZSBsb3MgZGVyZWNob3MgZGUgYXV0b3IgcGFyYSBvdG9yZ2FyIGEgbGEgVW5pdmVyc2lkYWQgZGUgTcOhbGFnYSBsb3MgZGVyZWNob3MgcmVxdWVyaWRvcyBwb3IgZXN0YSBsaWNlbmNpYSwgeSBxdWUgZXNlIG1hdGVyaWFsIGN1eW9zIGRlcmVjaG9zIHNvbiBkZSB0ZXJjZXJvcyBlc3TDoSBjbGFyYW1lbnRlIGlkZW50aWZpY2FkbyB5IHJlY29ub2NpZG8gZW4gZWwgdGV4dG8gbyBjb250ZW5pZG8gZGVsIGRvY3VtZW50byBlbnRyZWdhZG8uCgo1LiBTaSBlbCBkb2N1bWVudG8gc2UgYmFzYSBlbiB1bmEgb2JyYSBxdWUgaGEgc2lkbyBwYXRyb2NpbmFkYSBvIGFwb3lhZGEgcG9yIHVuYSBhZ2VuY2lhIHUgb3JnYW5pemFjacOzbiBkaWZlcmVudGUgZGUgbGEgVW5pdmVyc2lkYWQgZGUgTcOhbGFnYSwgc2UgcHJlc3Vwb25lIHF1ZSBzZSBoYSBjdW1wbGlkbyBjb24gY3VhbHF1aWVyIGRlcmVjaG8gZGUgcmV2aXNpw7NuIHUgb3RyYXMgb2JsaWdhY2lvbmVzIHJlcXVlcmlkYXMgcG9yIGVzdGUgY29udHJhdG8gbyBhY3VlcmRvLgoKNi4gTGEgVW5pdmVyc2lkYWQgZGUgTcOhbGFnYSBpZGVudGlmaWNhcsOhIGNsYXJhbWVudGUgc3UvcyBub21icmUvcyBjb21vIGVsL2xvcyBhdXRvci9lcyBvIHByb3BpZXRhcmlvL3MgZGUgbG9zIGRlcmVjaG9zIGRlbCBkb2N1bWVudG8sIHkgbm8gaGFyw6EgbmluZ3VuYSBhbHRlcmFjacOzbiBkZSBzdSBkb2N1bWVudG8gZGlmZXJlbnRlIGEgbGFzIHBlcm1pdGlkYXMgZW4gZXN0YSBsaWNlbmNpYS4KCg== URL https://riuma.uma.es/bitstreams/2f7715cd-c57f-42bc-bc47-4ad3f102f609/download File MD5 c6334a7c8018e465b56b72b20033b627 309524 application/pdf Detection methods predict2012.pdf