What information should be given to women invited for mammographic screening for breast cancer?

Women's Health

Volumn 2, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 829-833

  Duffy, Stephen W ^a   Tabar, Laszlo ^b   Cherr, Tony H H ^c   Yen, Amy M F ^c   Dean, Peter B ^d   Smith, Robert A ^e  

^a IMPERIAL CANCER RESEARCH FUND   (United Kingdom)

^b FALUN HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^d UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

^e AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast screening; Informed decision making; Mammography

Indexed keywords

ANXIETY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC ERROR; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL INFORMATION; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; RISK REDUCTION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 33751435917     PISSN: 17455057     EISSN: 17455065     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/17455057.2.6.829     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Thornton H, Edwards A, Baum M: Women need better information about routine mammography. BMJ327, 101-103 (2003).
2. Jorgenson KJ, Gøtzsche P: Presentation on websites of possible benefits and harms from screening for breast cancer: cross-sectional study. BMJ 328, 148 (2004).
3. Gøtzsche PC, Jorgenson KJ: Content of invitations for publicly funded screening mammography. BMJ 332, 538-541 (2006).
4. Barratt A, Howard K, Irwig L, Salkeld G, Houssami N: Model of outcomes of screening mammography: information to support informed choices: BMJ 330, 936 (2005).
5. Giordano L, Rowinski M. Gaudenzi G. Segnan N: What information do breast cancer screening programmes provide to Italian women? Eur. J. Public Health 15, 66-69 (2005).
6. Vainio H, Bianchini F (Eds): Breast Cancer Screening. IARC Press, Lyon, France (2002).
7. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH: Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann. Intern. Med. 137, 347-360 (2002).
8. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA et al: American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J. Clin. 53, 141-169 (2003).
9. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L. Yen MF, Chen THH: The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned. Radiol. Clin. N. Am. 42, 793-806 (2004).
10. Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group: Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organised service screening with mammography: 1. Further confirmation with extended data. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 15, 45-51 (2006).
11. Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group: Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organised service screening with mammography: 2. Validation with alternative analytic methods. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 15, 52-56 (2006).
12. Tabar L, Vitak B, Yen MFA, Chen HHT, Smith RA, Duffy SW: Number needed to screen: lives saved over 20 years of follow-up in mammographic screening. J. Med. Screen. 11, 126-129 (2004).
13. Patnick J (Ed.): One Vision, NHS Breast cancer screening programme, Annual Review 2005. NHS Breast Screening Programme, Sheffield, UK (2005).
14. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy, SW, Day NE, Gad A, Gröntoft O: Update of the Swedish Two-County program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol. Clin. N. Am. 30, 187-210 (1992).
15. Tabar L, Chen HHT, Yen MFA et al.: Mammographic tumor features can predict long-term outcomes reliably in women with 1-14 mm invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 101, 1745-1759 (2004).
16. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Day NE. Duffy SW, Kitchin RM: Breast cancer treatment and natural history: new insights from results of screening. Lancet 339, 412-414 (1992).
17. Paci E, Duffy SW, Giorgi D et al.: Am breast cancer screening programmes increasing rates of mastectomy? Observational study. BMJ 325, 418 (2002).
18. Brett J, Austoker J, Ong G: Do women who undergo further investigation for breast cancer screening suffer adverse psychological consequences? J. Public Health Med. 20, 396-403 (1998).
19. Zahl PH, Strand BH, Maehlen J: Incidence of breast cancer in Norway and Sweden during introduction of nationwide screening: prospective cohort study. BMJ 328, 921-924 (2004).
20. Paci E, Warwick J, Falini P, Duffy SW: Overdiagnosis in screening: is the increase in breast cancer incidence rates a cause for concern? J Med Screen. 11, 23-27 (2004).
21. Duffy SW, Agbaje O, Tabar L et al.: Estimates of overdiagnosis from two trials of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 7, 258-265 (2005).
22. Zackrisson S, Andersson I, Janzon L, Manjer J, Garne JP: Rate of over-diagnosis of breast cancer 15 years after end of Malmö mammographic screening trial: follow-up study. BMJ 332, 689-692 (2006).
23. Page DL, Dupont WD. Rogers LW, Jensen RA, Schuyler PA: Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15-25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer 76, 1197-2000 (1995).
24. Yen MF, Tabar L, Vitak B, Smith RA, Chen HH, Duffy SW: Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. Eur. J. Cancer 39, 1746-1754 (2003).
25. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Wilson AR: Screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): overdiagnosis or an obligate precursor of invasive disease? J. Med. Screen. 8, 149-151 (2001).