Breast cancer screening: Early recognition

Comprehensive Therapy

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 7-12

  Costanza, Mary E ^a,b   Edmiston, Kathryn L ^b,c  

^a Department of Medicine ^*  (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c Division of Gynecologic Oncology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL SOCIETY; META ANALYSIS; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; REVIEW;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FEMALE; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; QUALITY CONTROL; RISK FACTORS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0031029596     PISSN: 00988243     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Parker SL, Tony T, Bolden S, Wingo P. Cancer statistics. ÇA J Clinicians. 1996;46:1.
2. King SE, Schottenfeld D. The epidemic of breast cancer in the US: determining the fac-tors. Oncology. 1996:453-464.
3. Yim JH, Barton P, Weber B, et al. Mammographically detected breast cancer: benefits of stereotactic core versus wire localization biopsy. Ann Surg. 1996;223(6):688-700.
4. Sickles EA. Nonpalpable, circumscribed, noncalcified solid breast masses: likelihood of malignancy based on lesion size and age of patient. Radiology. 1994:439-442.
5. Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, et al. Report of the alternative workshop on screening for breast cancer. J NatI Cancer Inst. 1993;85:16441656.
6. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, et al. Update on Swedish two-county program of mammographie screening for breast cancer. Radial Clin North Am. 1992;30:187-210.
7. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, et al. Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta analysis. JAMA. 1995;273:149-154.
8. US Preventive Services Task Force Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. 2nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins; 1996.
9. Costanza ME, D Orsi CJ, Greene HL, et al. Feasibility of universal screening mammography. Arch Intern Med. 1991;151:1851-1856.
10. Bassett LW, Hendrick RE, Bassford TL, et al. Quality Determinants of Mammography. Clinical Practice Guideline. No 13 AHCPR Publication No. 95-0632. Rockville,-MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services. October 1994.
11. Fletcher S, O'Malley M, Bunce L. Physicians' abilities to detect lumps in silicon breast models. JAMA. 1985;253:2224-2228.
12. King MC, Rowell S, Love SM: Inherited breast and ovarian cancer: what are the risks? what are the choices? JAMA. 1993;269(15):19751980.