The indiscriminate use of SLNB in patients with DCIS seems excessive. Our study suggests that patients with a mass on clinical examination or mammogram have an increased risk of invasive disease at the time of definitive operative procedure and should undergo SLNB at the initial procedure. In addition, SLNB should be performed in patients undergoing mastectomy because mastectomy precludes SLNB if invasive disease is subsequently discovered.

SummaryBackgroundThe value of screen detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a matter of controversy. At present, the extent to which the diagnosis and treatment of DCIS could prevent the occurrence of invasive breast cancer in the future is not clear. We sought to estimate the association between detection of DCIS at screening and invasive interval cancers subsequent to the relevant screen.MethodsWe obtained aggregate data for screen-detected cancers from 84 local screening units within 11 regional Quality Assurance Reference Centres in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland from the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme. Data for DCIS diagnoses were obtained for women aged 50–64 years who were invited to and attended mammographic breast screening from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2007 (4 screening years). Patient-level data for interval cancer arising in the 36 months after each of these were analysed by Poisson regression with invasive interval cancer screen detection rate as the outcome variable; DCIS detection frequencies were fitted first as a continuous and then as a categorical variable. We repeated this analysis after adjustment with both small size and high-grade invasive screen-detected cancers.FindingsWe analysed data for 5 243 658 women and on interval cancers occurring in the 36 months after the relevant screen. The average frequency of DCIS detected at screening was 1·60 per 1000 women screened (median 1·50 [unit range 1·54–3·56] per 1000 women). There was a significant negative association of screen-detected DCIS cases with the rate of invasive interval cancers (Poisson regression coefficient −0·084 [95% CI −0·13 to −0·03]; p=0·002). 90% of units had a DCIS detection frequency within the range of 1·00 to 2·22 per 1000 women; in these units, for every three screen-detected cases of DCIS, there was one fewer invasive interval cancer in the next 3 years. This association remained after adjustment for numbers of small screen-detected invasive cancers and for numbers of grade 3 invasive screen-detected cancers.InterpretationThe association between screen-detected DCIS and subsequent invasive interval cancers suggests that detection and treatment of DCIS is worthwhile in prevention of future invasive disease.FundingUK Department of Health Policy Research Programme and NHS Cancer Screening Programmes.

Despite evidence of accurate targeting of lesions, the use of NCB instead of fine needle aspiration cytology has not eliminated the problem of false negative biopsy in RS/CSL, and excision is recommended.

Four hundred forty-seven needle biopsies of the lung were carried out on 348 patients in a nonhospital outpatient setting. There were no fatalities or serious complications. A reliable working diagnosis was obtained in 74% of patients (86% true positive for malignancy). Diagnostic thoracotomy was avoided in 31%, and the diagnostic interval was shortened in most. Impressive economic benefits resulted. Careful postbiopsy evaluation revealed pneumothorax in 41% of patients, with 10% requiring chest tube drainage, usually on an ambulatory basis. With management of the infrequent complications by the radiologist, outpatient needle biopsy of the lung can be safe, reliable, and highly cost effective.

Background:The introduction of two-view mammography at incident (subsequent) screens in the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) has led to an increased number of cancers detected at screen. However, the effect of two-view mammography on interval cancer rates has yet to be assessed.Methods:Routine screening and interval cancer data were collated from all screening programmes in the United Kingdom for women aged 50–64, screened between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2005. Interval cancer rates were compared based on whether two-view mammography was in use at the last routine screen.Results:The reduction in interval cancers following screening using two-view mammography compared with one view was 0.68 per 1 000 women screened. Overall, this suggests the introduction of two-view mammography at incident screen was accompanied by a 15–20% reduction in interval cancer rates in the NHSBSP.Conclusion:The introduction of two-view mammography at incident screens is associated with a reduction in incidence of interval cancers. This is consistent with previous publications on a contemporaneous increase in screen-detected cancers. The results provide further evidence of the benefit of the use of two-view mammography at incident screens.