Früherkennung von Brust- und Gebärmutterhalskrebs – ein systematischer Review zu Wissen, Einstellungen und Inanspruchnahmeverhalten der Frauen in Deutschland

Dreier, Maren; Borutta, B; Töppich, J.; Bitzer, EM; Walter, Ulla

doi:10.1055/s-0031-1286271

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, younger patients in Germany are diagnosed more often with early tumour stages [14]. While other studies have shown that more advanced tumour stages are mainly found in older patients [13,15], this could not be confirmed by the present data. The literature reports contradictory findings on the influence of age on prognosis: While Kumar et al has observed an influence in his SEER data analysis [5], others did not [16].…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Impact of Age on the Prognosis of Vulvar Cancer

Hami

Lampe²,

Mallmann

et al. 2018

Oncol Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Younger women are particularly affected by the increase in the incidence of vulvar cancer. The purpose of this study was to investigate how clinical characteristics differ depending on the patient´s age and what role the age of initial diagnosis plays in the prognosis. Patients andMethods: Included patients were divided into groups aged below or above 50 years. The disease-free survival (DFS) was calculated and a multivariate discriminant analysis was conducted. Results: Of the 300 patients, 79 were ≤50 years and 221 were >50 years. The median age was 64 years (19-96 years). There were no differences between the groups regarding lymph node (LN) status and distant metastasis, but T1 tumours were more frequent in patients ≤50 years (77% vs. 62%, p = 0.02). The DFS only differed between the groups when there were no LN metastases. The nodal status was the predominant prognostic factor for the DFS regardless of age. In node-free patients, the 5-year DFS was 49% for the ≤50 years group and 89% for the >50 years group (p = 0.008), whereas there was no difference if a LN was involved. Conclusion: In node-free patients, the risk for recurrence is lower for patients older than 50 years.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 96%

“…This may be due to the fact that younger women pay more attention to their bodies or participate more regularly in PAP-smear screening for cervical cancer [13], during which incidental vulvar carcinomas could be discovered by the examining gynaecologist.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Age on the Prognosis of Vulvar Cancer

Hami

Lampe²,

Mallmann

et al. 2018

Oncol Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2002–04, 45.3% of women aged 55 years or older residing in Saarland reported to have had a mammography within the last two years (unpublished data from the population-based ESTHER cohort study in Saarland [43,44]). For 2007–08, a proportion of 53% of eligible women participating in the organized screening was reported [45,46]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends of population-based breast cancer survival in Germany and the US: Decreasing discrepancies, but persistent survival gap of elderly patients in Germany

Holleczek

Brenner

2012

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundStudies have revealed both higher cancer survival in the US than in Germany and substantial improvement of cancer survival in the past in these countries. This population-based study aims at comparing most recent 5-year relative survival of breast cancer patients and preceding trends in both countries.MethodsWomen with a first invasive breast cancer diagnosed and followed up between 1988 and 2008 from Germany and the US (utilizing data from the Saarland Cancer Registry and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, respectively) were included. Period analysis was used to derive most up-to-date 5-year relative survival and preceding survival trends according to age and stage.ResultsSince 1993, age standardized relative survival has steadily improved in Germany and the US to 83% and 88%, respectively. In the period 2005–08, relative survival of localized cancer was above 97% in both countries, and 79% and 83% for locally/regionally spread breast cancer, respectively. Prognosis of metastasized disease has remained very poor overall, with improvement essentially being restricted to younger patients. The proportion of patients diagnosed with localized breast cancer was consistently higher in the US. If adjusted for stage, the differences in relative survival between both countries diminished over time and eventually disappeared.ConclusionsSimilar survival is now observed in both countries for patients below the age of 70 years, but in Germany survival is still much lower for elderly patients. The observed trends point to treatment advances as a major cause for improved survival. However, substantial differences in mammography usage existed between both countries and might probably also account for the observed differences (to a lesser extent, also differences in health care systems, and delivery of cancer care). Encouraging, survival of breast cancer patients has improved in Germany to a much greater extent than in the US, albeit the persisting survival gap for elderly patients in Germany requires particular attention by researchers, public health authorities, and clinicians.

show abstract

“…The results lead to the assumption that participants with higher health literacy have less information needs regarding questions about follow-up care after the acute treatment, questions about the use of long-term side effects and about heredity of breast cancer. Furthermore, a lower level of health literacy is linked with inadequate patient-physician communication [24][25][26]. Regarding questions about the subject heredity of breast cancer, it seems hardly surprising that respondents with children have a significantly increased likelihood of unmet information needs [27].…”

Section: Main Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Important considerations can be explained due to the inclusion of the patients' characteristics. It seems, in addition to the level of health literacy, school education, age, and language skills of the respondents, that the kind of realized information deficiency and the demanded offers also play a vital role in this matter [24,29]. A single follow-up care plan that provides appropriate patient-centered information for the patient can contribute at best to reduce the unmet information needs [30].…”

Section: Main Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%