Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Die Vorsorgen der Anderen
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Die Vorsorgen der Anderen
Thomas Rösch plaudert mit Michael Bretthauer
Thomas Rösch spricht mit Michael Bretthauer über seine neueste Analyse über die allgemeine Lebensverlängerung und die Evidenzgrad des kolorektalen Karzinomscreenings im Vergleich zu den Reihenuntersuchungen der anderen Fachrichtungen. Wie stehen “wir“ da? Gar nicht schlecht…
Bretthauer M, Wieszczy P, Løberg M, Kaminski MF, Werner TF, Helsingen LM, Mori Y, Holme Ø, Adami HO, Kalager M. Estimated Lifetime Gained With Cancer Screening Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2023 Aug 28:e233798. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.3798.
Zitat: “ The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that current evidence does not substantiate the claim that common cancer screening tests save lives by extending lifetime, except possibly for colorectal cancer screening with sigmoidoscopy.“
P. C. Gøtzsche and K. J. Jørgensen: Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013 Vol. 2013 Issue 6 Pages Cd001877:
Zitat: “Eight trials provided data. We classified three trials as adequately randomised (Canada PP, Malmö uptake 70-74% and UK age trial uptake 68%) and four as suboptimally randomized (Göteborg, New York, Stockholm, TwoCounty), as was also the extension of the Malmö trial, MMST II. One trial (Edinburgh) was not adequately randomised and cannot provide reliable data. The three adequately randomised trials did not find a statistically significant effect of screening on deaths ascribed to breast cancer, relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.09) aſter 7 years and RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.02) aſter 13 years. The four suboptimally randomised trials found a beneficial effect: RR 0.71 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.83) aſter 7 years and RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83) aſter 13 years.”
Richman IB, Long JB, Soulos PR, Wang SY, Gross CP.. Estimating Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis After Screening Mammography Among Older Women in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2023 Sep;176(9):1172-1180. doi: 10.7326/M23-0133. Epub 2023 Aug 8.
Zitat: “ Continued breast cancer screening was associated with greater incidence of breast cancer, suggesting overdiagnosis may be common among older women who are diagnosed with breast cancer after screening. Whether harms of overdiagnosis are balanced by benefits and for whom remains an important question.“
L. Peirson, D. Fitzpatrick-Lewis, D. Ciliska and R. Warren: Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2013 Vol. 2 Pages 35
Zitat: “ The available evidence supports the conclusion that cervical screening does offer protective benefits and is associated with a reduction in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer and cervical cancer mortality.“
J. J. Fenton, M. S. Weyrich, S. Durbin, Y. Liu, H. Bang and J. Melnikow. Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama 2018 Vol. 319 Issue 18 Pages 1914-1931
Zitat: “ PSA screening may reduce prostate cancer mortality risk but is associated with false-positive results, biopsy complications, and overdiagnosis. Compared with conservative approaches, active treatments for screen-detected prostate cancer have unclear effects on long-term survival but are associated with sexual and urinary difficulties.“
Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, Davis M, Turner EL, Martin RM, Young GJ, Walsh EI, Bryant RJ, Bollina P, Doble A, Doherty A, Gillatt D, Gnanapragasam V, Hughes O, Kockelbergh R, Kynaston H, Paul A, Paez E, Powell P, Rosario DJ, Rowe E, Mason M, Catto JWF, Peters TJ, Oxley J, Williams NJ, Staffurth J, Neal DE; ProtecT Study Group. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023 Apr 27;388(17):1547-1558. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2214122. Epub 2023 Mar 11.PMID: 36912538
Zitat: “After 15 years of follow-up, prostate cancer-specific mortality was low regardless of the treatment assigned.“
H. Yang, J. Varley-Campbell, H. Coelho, L. Long, S. Robinson, T. Snowsill, E. Griffin, J. Peters, C. Hyde: Do we know enough about the effect of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer on survival to act? A systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Diagn Progn Res. 2019.
Zitat: “LDCT screening may be effective in reducing lung cancer mortality but there is considerable uncertainty“
Alle Informationen und Links zur Folge finden Sie in den Shownotes und unter dgvs.de/podcast
Wenn Ihnen die Folge gefallen hat, abonnieren Sie uns oder lassen Sie uns eine Bewertung da.
Haben Sie Feedback oder Fragen zur Folge oder möchten Sie ein Thema vorschlagen, dann schreiben Sie uns an [email protected].
_Die im Podcast besprochenen Themen sind sorgfältig recherchiert. Die dargestellten Inhalte erheben jedoch in medizinischer Hinsicht keinerlei Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit, Aktualität, Richtigkeit und Ausgewogenheit. Sie sind in keiner Weise ein Ersatz für Leitlinien und andere Quellen evidenzbasierten medizinischen und wissenschaftlichen Wissens, professionelle Diagnosen, Beratungen oder Behandlungen durch ausgebildete und anerkannte Ärzte/Ärztinnen. Ebenso bleiben die behandelnden Ärzte/Ärztinnen verantwortlich für jede diagnostische und therapeutische Applikation, Medikation und Dosierung. _
Endoskopie, Darmkrebs, Vorsorge
View all episodes
By DGVSThomas Rösch plaudert mit Michael Bretthauer
Thomas Rösch spricht mit Michael Bretthauer über seine neueste Analyse über die allgemeine Lebensverlängerung und die Evidenzgrad des kolorektalen Karzinomscreenings im Vergleich zu den Reihenuntersuchungen der anderen Fachrichtungen. Wie stehen “wir“ da? Gar nicht schlecht…
Bretthauer M, Wieszczy P, Løberg M, Kaminski MF, Werner TF, Helsingen LM, Mori Y, Holme Ø, Adami HO, Kalager M. Estimated Lifetime Gained With Cancer Screening Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. JAMA Intern Med. 2023 Aug 28:e233798. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.3798.
Zitat: “ The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that current evidence does not substantiate the claim that common cancer screening tests save lives by extending lifetime, except possibly for colorectal cancer screening with sigmoidoscopy.“
P. C. Gøtzsche and K. J. Jørgensen: Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013 Vol. 2013 Issue 6 Pages Cd001877:
Zitat: “Eight trials provided data. We classified three trials as adequately randomised (Canada PP, Malmö uptake 70-74% and UK age trial uptake 68%) and four as suboptimally randomized (Göteborg, New York, Stockholm, TwoCounty), as was also the extension of the Malmö trial, MMST II. One trial (Edinburgh) was not adequately randomised and cannot provide reliable data. The three adequately randomised trials did not find a statistically significant effect of screening on deaths ascribed to breast cancer, relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.09) aſter 7 years and RR 0.90 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.02) aſter 13 years. The four suboptimally randomised trials found a beneficial effect: RR 0.71 (95% CI 0.61 to 0.83) aſter 7 years and RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.83) aſter 13 years.”
Richman IB, Long JB, Soulos PR, Wang SY, Gross CP.. Estimating Breast Cancer Overdiagnosis After Screening Mammography Among Older Women in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2023 Sep;176(9):1172-1180. doi: 10.7326/M23-0133. Epub 2023 Aug 8.
Zitat: “ Continued breast cancer screening was associated with greater incidence of breast cancer, suggesting overdiagnosis may be common among older women who are diagnosed with breast cancer after screening. Whether harms of overdiagnosis are balanced by benefits and for whom remains an important question.“
L. Peirson, D. Fitzpatrick-Lewis, D. Ciliska and R. Warren: Screening for cervical cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2013 Vol. 2 Pages 35
Zitat: “ The available evidence supports the conclusion that cervical screening does offer protective benefits and is associated with a reduction in the incidence of invasive cervical cancer and cervical cancer mortality.“
J. J. Fenton, M. S. Weyrich, S. Durbin, Y. Liu, H. Bang and J. Melnikow. Prostate-Specific Antigen-Based Screening for Prostate Cancer: Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Jama 2018 Vol. 319 Issue 18 Pages 1914-1931
Zitat: “ PSA screening may reduce prostate cancer mortality risk but is associated with false-positive results, biopsy complications, and overdiagnosis. Compared with conservative approaches, active treatments for screen-detected prostate cancer have unclear effects on long-term survival but are associated with sexual and urinary difficulties.“
Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Metcalfe C, Davis M, Turner EL, Martin RM, Young GJ, Walsh EI, Bryant RJ, Bollina P, Doble A, Doherty A, Gillatt D, Gnanapragasam V, Hughes O, Kockelbergh R, Kynaston H, Paul A, Paez E, Powell P, Rosario DJ, Rowe E, Mason M, Catto JWF, Peters TJ, Oxley J, Williams NJ, Staffurth J, Neal DE; ProtecT Study Group. Fifteen-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2023 Apr 27;388(17):1547-1558. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2214122. Epub 2023 Mar 11.PMID: 36912538
Zitat: “After 15 years of follow-up, prostate cancer-specific mortality was low regardless of the treatment assigned.“
H. Yang, J. Varley-Campbell, H. Coelho, L. Long, S. Robinson, T. Snowsill, E. Griffin, J. Peters, C. Hyde: Do we know enough about the effect of low-dose computed tomography screening for lung cancer on survival to act? A systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Diagn Progn Res. 2019.
Zitat: “LDCT screening may be effective in reducing lung cancer mortality but there is considerable uncertainty“
Alle Informationen und Links zur Folge finden Sie in den Shownotes und unter dgvs.de/podcast
Wenn Ihnen die Folge gefallen hat, abonnieren Sie uns oder lassen Sie uns eine Bewertung da.
Haben Sie Feedback oder Fragen zur Folge oder möchten Sie ein Thema vorschlagen, dann schreiben Sie uns an [email protected].
_Die im Podcast besprochenen Themen sind sorgfältig recherchiert. Die dargestellten Inhalte erheben jedoch in medizinischer Hinsicht keinerlei Anspruch auf Vollständigkeit, Aktualität, Richtigkeit und Ausgewogenheit. Sie sind in keiner Weise ein Ersatz für Leitlinien und andere Quellen evidenzbasierten medizinischen und wissenschaftlichen Wissens, professionelle Diagnosen, Beratungen oder Behandlungen durch ausgebildete und anerkannte Ärzte/Ärztinnen. Ebenso bleiben die behandelnden Ärzte/Ärztinnen verantwortlich für jede diagnostische und therapeutische Applikation, Medikation und Dosierung. _
Endoskopie, Darmkrebs, Vorsorge
More shows like GASTRO GEPLAUDER: Der gastroenterologische Wissens-Podcast
View all
Lage der Nation - der Politik-Podcast aus Berlin
228 Listeners
Hotel Matze
184 Listeners
AMBOSS Podcast – Ärztliches Wissen für Klinik und Praxis
18 Listeners
Klinisch Relevant Podcast
4 Listeners
Hand, Fuß, Mund
6 Listeners
Der Springer Medizin Podcast
4 Listeners
ENDO Podcast - Good Morning Endoscopy!
0 Listeners
LANZ & PRECHT
322 Listeners
'ne Dosis Wissen | Der Medizin-Podcast für Menschen im Gesundheitswesen
1 Listeners
Ist das eine Blase?
0 Listeners
Was bisher geschah - Geschichtspodcast
45 Listeners
Die Expertise-Piraten • Kindermedizin zum Hören
2 Listeners
GASTRO GEPLAUDER: Der gastroenterologische Wissens-Podcast
1 Listeners
Fest & Flauschig
12 Listeners
Denkfabrik Medizin
2 Listeners