What should the burden of proof be for acceptance of a new breast-cancer screening technique?

Lancet

Volumn 364, Issue 9440, 2004, Pages 1111-1112

  Yaffe, Martin J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL LITERATURE; NOTE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STANDARDIZATION; X RAY ANALYSIS;

EID: 4644223060     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)17121-3     Document Type: Note

References (14)

1. Irwig L, Houssami N, van Vliet C. New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy. Br J Cancer. 90:2004;2118-2122
2. American College of Radiology Imaging Network. Current Protocols. http://www.acrin.org/current_protocols.html (accessed Aug 12, 2004).
3. Nyström L, Wall S, Rutqvist LE, et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 341:1993;973-978
4. Hendrick RE, Smith RA, Rutledge JH 3rd, Smart CR. Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40-49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 22:1997;87-92
5. Tabar L, Yen MF, Vitak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet. 361:2003;1405-1410
6. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen H-H, et al. The Swedish two-county trial twenty years later: updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am. 38:2000;625-651
7. Trudeau ME, Pritchard KI, Chapman J-AW, et al. Prognostic factors affecting the natural history of node-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat (in press).
8. Hayes DF, Bast RC, Desch CE, et al. Tumor marker utility grading system: a framework to evaluate clinical utility of tumor markers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 88:1996;1456-1466
9. Gusterson BA. The change in the role of the pathologist in the prediction of tumor behaviour and response to treatment. Dickson RB, Lippmann HE. Doctors drugs and hormonal resistance in breast cancer. 1995;39-53 Ellis Harwood, New York
10. Heimann R, Hellman S. Individual characterisation of the metastatic capacity of human breast carcinoma. Eur J Cancer. 36:2000;1631-1639
11. Hellman S, Heimann R. The clinical significance of tumor progression: breast cancer as a model. Cancer J. 6:(suppl 2):2000;S131-133
12. Heimann R, Hellman S. Aging, progression, and phenotype in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 16:1998;2686-2692
13. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C,. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 351:2004;497-500
14. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill K, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography and clinical breast examination. JAMA (in press).