4.5 Review

Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group

期刊

CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 8, 期 -, 页码 445-449

出版社

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S99457

关键词

breast cancer; database; guidelines; quality control; research

资金

  1. Program for Clinical Research Infrastructure (PROCRIN)
  2. Lundbeck Foundation
  3. Novo Nordisk Foundation
  4. Lundbeck Foundation [R155-2014-2647] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. Novo Nordisk Fonden [NNF14SA0015794] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim of database: Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG), with an associated database, was introduced as a nationwide multidisciplinary group in 1977 with the ultimate aim to improve the prognosis in breast cancer. Since then, the database has registered women diagnosed with primary invasive nonmetastatic breast cancer. The data reported from the departments to the database included details of the characteristics of the primary tumor, of surgery, radiotherapy, and systemic therapies, and of follow-up reported on specific forms from the departments in question. Descriptive data: From 1977 through 2014, similar to 110,000 patients are registered in the nationwide, clinical database. The completeness has gradually improved to more than 95%. DBCG has continuously prepared evidence-based guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer and conducted quality control studies to ascertain the degree of adherence to the guidelines in the different departments. Conclusion: Utilizing data from the DBCG database, a long array of high-quality DBCG studies of various designs and scope, nationwide or in international collaboration, have contributed to the current updating of the guidelines, and have been an instrumental resource in the improvement of management and prognosis of breast cancer in Denmark. Thus, since the establishment of DBCG, the prognosis in breast cancer has continuously improved with a decrease in 5-year mortality from similar to 37% to 15%.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据