This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Giorgio Cocconi, MD
University Hospital Parma, Italy

JAMA. 1994;272(21):1657-1658.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.

—Two articles recently published in THE JOURNAL^1,2 indicate that conservative follow-up (ie, history and physical examinations every 3 months and mammography once a year) for patients with operable breast cancer is as good as a more intensive and expensive approach that would include periodic chest radiography, bone scanning, and in one study, liver ultrasonography. Overall survival and quality of life did not differ between the two types of follow-up. Disease-free survival was shorter in one study with intensive monitoring as a result of earlier detection of metastasis. Overall, the conclusions reached by the authors are supported by the findings.

However, I believe that several issues should be considered that may undermine the universality of these conclusions. The findings reported in these two randomized trials are not surprising, since at present, chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for metastatic breast carcinoma are palliative, and therefore, it is unlikely that . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?