Recommendations for the surveillance of young women at increased risk for breast cancer

Australasian Radiology

Volumn 51, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-11

  Hadden, W E ^a  

^a Auckland Radiology Group   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; High risk; Mammography; MRI; Ultrasound; Young women

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

AGE DISTRIBUTION; AUSTRALIA AND NEW ZEALAND; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST SELF EXAMINATION; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PREVENTION; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; ECHOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FAMILY HISTORY; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC RISK; HETEROZYGOTE; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASTECTOMY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOGENE; OVARY CANCER; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION CARCINOGENESIS; RADIATION HAZARD; RADIODIAGNOSIS; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AUSTRALIA; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; NEW ZEALAND; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; RISK FACTORS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 33846168124     PISSN: 00048461     EISSN: 14401673     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1673.2006.01645.x     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the breast cancer screening working group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985; 333: 829-32.
2. Nystrom L, Rutqvist LE, Wall F et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 1993; 341: 973-8.
3. Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N et al. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 2002; 359: 909-19.
4. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomised control trials: organised mammographic screening substantially reduces breast cancer mortality. Cancer 2001; 91: 1724-31.
5. Kopans DB. Sonography should not be used for breast cancer screening until its efficacy has been proven scientifically. AJR 2004; 182: 489-91.
6. Kopans DB. Mammography screening and the controversy concerning women aged 40-49. Radiol Clin North Am 1995; 33: 1273-90.
7. Burke W, Daly M, Garber J et al. Recommendations for follow-up care of individuals with an inherited predisposition to cancer. II. BRCA1 and BRCA2. Cancer genetic studies consortium. JAMA 1997; 277: 997-1003.
8. RNZCGP. Guidelines for Primary Care Providers: Early Detection of Breast Cancer. Royal New Zealand College of General Practitioners, Wellington, NZ, 1999.
9. Bennett IC, Gattas M, Teh BT. The management of familial breast cancer. The Breast 2000; 9: 247-63.
10. Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T et al. Cancer statistics 2004. CA Cancer J Clin 2004; 54: 8-29.
11. Current Best Advice on the Familial Aspects of Breast Cancer. Australian Genetics Working Group, NBCC. Australian Government Publishing Service, NHMRC Canberra, 1997.
12. Macmillan RD. Screening women with a family history of breast cancer - results from the British familial breast cancer Group. Eur J Surg Oncol 2000; 26: 149-52.
13. Meijers-Heijboer H, van Geel B, van Putten WLJ et al. Breast cancer after prophylactic bilateral mastectomy in women with a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 159-64.
14. Moss SM, Coleman DA, Ellman R et al. Interval cancers and sensitivity of screening in centres of the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993, 29: 255-8.
15. Thomas DB, Gao DL, Ray RM et al. Randomised trial of breast self-examination in Shanghai. Final results. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 1445-57.
16. Advisory committee. Clinical examination and breast self-examination. In: Screening for breast cancer in England: past and future. NHSBSP Publication No. 61. NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, Fulwood House, Sheffield S10 3TH, 2006; 32.
17. Berg WA. Rationale for a trial of screening breast ultrasound: American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ACRIN) 6666. AJR 2003; 180: 1225-8.
18. Breast Screen Australia. Available from URL: http://www.breastscreen. info.au
19. BreastScreen Aoteoroa New Zealand. Available from URL: http://www.breastscreen.org.nz
20. Ziv E, Shepherd J, Smith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K. Mammographic breast density and family history of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95: 556-8.
21. Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH III, Smith RA. Benefit of mammography screening in women aged 40 to 49 years. Cancer 1986; 75: 1619-26.
22. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1773-83.
23. Kerlikowske K, Carney PA, Geller B et al. Performance of screening mammography among women with and without a first-degree relative with breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 855-63.
24. Foxcroft LM, Evans EB, Porter AJ. The diagnosis of breast cancer in women younger than 40. The Breast 2004; 13: 297-306.
25. Friedenson B. Letter. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 936.
26. Law J, Faulkner K. Cancers detected and induced, and associated risk and benefit, in a breast screening programme. Br J Radiol 2001; 74: 1121-7.
27. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 1773-83.
28. Zadelis S, Houssami N. Mammographic features of breast cancer in young symptomatic women. Australas Radiol 2003; 47: 404-8.
29. Kopans DB. Breast sonographic screening is not ready for prime time. AJR 2003; 181: 1426-8.
30. Ciatto S, Rosselli del Turco M, Catarzi S et al. The diagnostic role of breast echography. Radiol Med 1994; 88: 221-4.
31. Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. AJR 2003; 180: 1675-9.
32. Houssami N, Irwig L, Simpson JM, McKessar K, Blome S, Noakes J. Sydney breast imaging accuracy study: comparative sensitivity and specificity of mammography and sonography in young women with symptoms. AJR 2003; 180: 935-40.
33. Crystal P, Strano S, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR 2003; 181: 177-82.
34. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Grontoft O. Update of the swedish Two-County program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1992; 30: 187-210.
35. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002; 225: 165-75.
36. Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001; 221: 641-9.
37. Robson ME, Offit K. Breast MRI for women with hereditary cancer risk. JAMA 2004; 292: 1368-70.
38. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Viehweg P, Heinig A et al. Contrast enhanced MRI of the breast: accuracy, value, controversies, solutions. Eur J Radiol 1997; 24: 94-108.
39. Warner E, Plewes DB, Kimberley AH et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004; 292: 1317-25.
40. Stoutjeskijk MJ, Boetes C, Jager GJ et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and mammography in women with a hereditary risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001; 93: 1095-102.
41. Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CC et al. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 2000; 215: 267-79.
42. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR 2003; 181: 619-26.
43. Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Boetes C et al. MRI screening for breast cancer in women with familial or genetic predisposition. Fam Cancer 2001; 1: 163-8.
44. Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Boetes C et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl JMed 2004; 351: 427-37.
45. Podo F, Sandanelli F, Canese R et al. The Italian multicentre project on evaluation of MRI and other imaging modalities in early detection of mammary tumours in subjects at high genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21: 115-24.
46. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC et al. Surveillance of 'high risk' women with proven or suspected familial (hereditary) breast cancer (abstract). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 2003; 22: 2.
47. Leach MO, Erles RA, Turnbull LW et al. The UK National study of magnetic reonance imaging for screening for breast cancer (MARIBS). J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21: 107-14.