Does stage at diagnosis explain the difference in survival after breast cancer in Denmark and Sweden?

REFERENCES

• Engeland A, Haldorsen T, Dickman PW, et al. Relative survival of cancer patients - a comparison between Denmark and the other Nordic countries. Acta Oncol 1998; 37: 49–59.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tulinius H, Storm HH, Pukkala E, Andersen A, Ericsson J. Cancer in the Nordic countries, 1981-86. A joint publication of the five Nordic Cancer Registries. APMIS Suppl 1992; 31: 1–194.
   Google Scholar
• Game JP, Aspegren K, Moller T. Validity of breast cancer registration from one hospital into the Swedish National Cancer Registry 1971-1991. Acta Oncol 1995; 34: 153–6.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen AR, Overgaard J, Storm HH. Validity of breast cancer in the Danish Cancer Registry. A study based on clinical records from one county in Denmark. Eur J Cancer Prey 2002; 11: 359–64.
   Google Scholar
• UICC, TNM classification of Malignant Tumours. 5th ed. 1997.
   Google Scholar
• Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, et al. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. Br Med J 1988; 297: 943–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tennvall-Nittby L, Tengrup I, Landberg T. The total incidence of loco-regional recurrence in a randomized trial of breast cancer TNM stage II. The South Sweden Breast Cancer Trial. Acta Oncol 1993; 32: 641–6.
   Google Scholar
• Andersen KW, Mouridsen HT. Danish Breast Cancer Co-operative Group (DBCG). A description of the register of the nation-wide programme for primary breast cancer. Acta Oncol 1988; 27: 627–47.
   Google Scholar
• Cancer incidence in five continents. IARC Science Publications, 1992.
   Google Scholar
• Hakulinen T. On long-term relative survival rates. J Chronic Dis 1977; 30: 431–43.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Themeau T, Sick J, Bergstralh E, Offors J. Expected survival on hazard rates. Technical Report no. 52. Rochester, MN, Mayo Foundation, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Hakulinen T. Cancer survival corrected for heterogeneity in patient withdrawal. Biometrics 1982; 38: 933–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tubiana M, Koscielny S. The rationale for early diagnosis of cancer-the example of breast cancer. Acta Oncol 1999; 38(3): 295–303.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Quiet CA, Ferguson DJ, Weichselbaum RR, Hellman S. Natural history of node-negative breast cancer: a study of 826 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1144–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koscielny S, Tubiana M, Le MG, Valleron AJ, Mouriesse H, Contesso G, et al. Breast cancer: relationship between the size of the primary tumour and the probability of metastatic dissemination. Br J Cancer 1984; 49: 709–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilking N, Rutqvist LE, Carstensen J, Mattsson A, Skoog L. Prognostic significance of axillary nodal status in primary breast cancer in relation to the number of resected nodes. Stockholm Breast Cancer Study Group. Acta Oncol 1992; 31: 29–35.
   Google Scholar
• Mathiesen O, Carl J, Bonderup O, Panduro J. Axillary sampling and the risk of erroneous staging of breast cancer. An analysis of 960 consecutive patients. Acta Oncol 1990; 29: 721–5.
   Google Scholar
• Axelsson CK, Mouridsen HT, Zedeler K. Axillary dissection of level I and II lymph nodes is important in breast cancer classification. The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Eur J Cancer 1992; 28A: 1415–8.
   Google Scholar
• Sakorafas GH, Tsiotou AG, Balsiger BM. Axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer - current status and controversies, alternative strategies and future perspectives. Acta Oncol 2000; 39: 455–66.
   Google Scholar
• Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK. The Will Rogers phenomenon. Stage migration and new diagnostic techniques as a source of misleading statistics for survival in cancer. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 1604–8.
   Google Scholar
• Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, Baldetorp L, Holmberg LH, Grontoft O, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985; 1: 829–32.
   Google Scholar
• IARC. IARC Handbooks of Cancer Prevention: Breast cancer screening. Lyon, IACR Press, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen LH, Engholm G, Ceberg J, et al. Can the survival difference between breast cancer patients in Denmark and Sweden 1989 and 1994 be explained by patho-anatomical variables - a population-based study. Eur J Cancer 2004; 40: 1233–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Board of Health CD. The Danish National Cancer Plan, II: epidemiology. Copenhagen, National Board of Health, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Manjer J, Andersson I, Berglund G, Bondesson L, Game JP, Janzon L, et al. Survival of women with breast cancer in relation to smoking. Eur J Surg 2000; 166: 852–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar