Volume 22, Issue 1 (5-2008)                   Med J Islam Repub Iran 2008 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Panahi G, Shabahang H, Sahebghalam H. Breast cancer risk assessment in Iranian women by Gail model. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2008; 22 (1) :37-39
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-64-en.html
Department of General Surgery. Arya Hospital, Eastern Golestan St.Mashhad, Iran. , drghazalpanahi@yahoo.com.
Abstract:   (7703 Views)

  Abstract

  Background: Due to the high incidence of breast cancer and the effect of its early

  diagnosis on decreasing morbidity and mortality, we used the Gail model to study

  breast cancer risk in Iranian women.

  Methods: This study was done in a simple randomized way. Participants were 2000

  Iranian women older than 35 years old. The questionnaire consisted of demographic

  data such as age, race (optional ) marriage status , level of education and standard questions of the Gail model. Gathered data were given in http://bcra. nci. nih.gov/brc. The breast cancer risk was calculated within the next 5 years and within the 90 years life

  span. The statistical analysis was done by SPSS software.

  Results: Mean age of women in the study was 47.95 years .50% of women had their

  menarche at/older than fourteen years of age. 50% of women had first childbirth in

  their twenties. 87% had a negative family history of breast cancer. 94% had no history

  of breast biopsy. Of the remaining 6%, no tissue atypia was reported. In the present

  study, breast cancer risk within 5 years was 0.92% and the breast cancer risk within 90

  years of life was 9.14%. 7% showed risk of more than 1.67% in the Gail model. The

  age ranged between 55-65 years in this high risk group.

  Conclusion: In our study of breast cancer risk in Iranian women, breast cancer risk

  was lower than the control group in the Gail model estimate for 5 years and a 90-year

  life span. (0.92% versus 1.02% , 9.14% versus 11.21%). The differences were statistically significant (p<0.001).

 

Full-Text [PDF 151 kb]   (2863 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Original Research | Subject: Surgery

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.