Breast cancer screening: Emerging role of new imaging techniques as adjuncts to mammography

Medical Journal of Australia

Volumn 190, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 493-498

  Houssami, Nehmat ^a   Lord, Sarah J ^a,b   Ciatto, Stefano ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b University of Sydney   (Australia)

^c Istituto Scientifico della Regione Toscana   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

AUSTRALIA; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CANCER STAGING; CANCER TISSUE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; ECHOGRAPHY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; GENE MUTATION; GROUPS BY AGE; HIGH RISK POPULATION; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; TUMOR BIOPSY; TUMOR VOLUME; BREAST TUMOR; CARCINOMA IN SITU; COMPUTER AIDED DESIGN; FEMALE; MASS SCREENING; METHODOLOGY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA IN SITU; COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 67649171144     PISSN: 0025729X     EISSN: 13265377     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02526.x     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC handbooks of cancer prevention: breast cancer screening. Lyon: IARC, 2002.
2. Gabe R, Duffy SW. Evaluation of service screening mammography in practice: the impact on breast cancer mortality. Ann Oncol 2005; 16 Suppl 2: ii153-ii162.
3. Roder DM, Houssami N, Farshid G, et al. Population screening and intensity of screening are associated with reduced breast cancer mortality: evidence of efficacy of mammography screening in Australia. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008; 108: 409-416.
4. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, et al. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2006; 368: 2053-2060.
5. Barratt AL, Irwig LM, Glasziou PP, et al. Benefits, harms and costs of screening mammography in women 70 years and over: a systematic review. Med J Aust 2002; 176: 266-271.
6. Irwig L, Macaskill P, Houssami N. Evidence relevant to the investigation of breast symptoms: the triple test. Breast 2002; 11: 215-220.
7. Houssami N, Irwig L, Ciatto S. Radiological surveillance of interval breast cancers in screening programmes. Lancet Oncol 2006; 7: 259-265.
8. Taylor R, Supramaniam R, Rickard M, et al. Interval breast cancers in New South Wales, Australia, and comparisons with trials and other mammographic screening programmes. J Med Screen 2002; 9: 20-25. (Pubitemid 34327138)
9. Irwig L, Houssami N, van Vliet C. New technologies in screening for breast cancer: a systematic review of their accuracy. Br J Cancer 2004; 90: 2118-2122.
10. Biesheuvel C, Barratt A, Howard K, et al. Effects of study methods and biases on estimates of invasive breast cancer overdetection with mammography screening: a systematic review. Lancet Oncol 2007; 8: 1129-1138. (Pubitemid 350182969)
11. Irwig L, Houssami N, Armstrong B, Glasziou P. Evaluating new screening tests for breast cancer [editorial]. BMJ 2006; 332: 678-679. (Pubitemid 44365679)
12. Houssami N, Cuzick J, Dixon JM. The prevention, detection, and management of breast cancer. Med J Aust 2006; 184: 230-234.
13. National Breast Cancer Centre. Advice about familial aspects of breast cancer and epithelial ovarian cancer. Sydney: NBCC, 2006. http://www.nbocc.org. au/bestpractice/resources/BOG182-adviceaboutfamiliala.pdf (accessed Sep 2008).
14. National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care. Familial breast cancer: the classification and care of women at risk of familial breast cancer in primary, secondary and tertiary care (partial update of Clinical Guideline 14). London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2006. http://www.nice.org.uk/Guidance/CG41 (accessed Sep 2008).
15. Lord SJ, Lei WA, Craft P, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an addition to mammography and ultrasound in screening young women at high risk of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 2007; 43: 1905-1917. (Pubitemid 47299201)
16. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 8469-8476. (Pubitemid 46260243)
17. Leach MO, Boggis CR, Dixon AK, et al; MARIBS study group. Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS). Lancet 2005; 365: 1769-1778. (Pubitemid 40744657)
18. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2005; 103: 1898-1905. (Pubitemid 40563263)
19. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 2007; 242: 698-715. (Pubitemid 46310082)
20. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004; 292: 1317-1325. (Pubitemid 39223222)
21. The Medical Services Advisory Committee. Breast magnetic resonance imaging. MSAC application 1098. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, 2007.
22. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA: Cancer J Clin 2007; 57: 75-89. (Pubitemid 46535708)
23. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 1159-1169.
24. Kerlikowske K, Ichikawa L, Miglioretti DL, et al. Longitudinal measurement of clinical mammographic breast density to improve estimation of breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99: 386-395. (Pubitemid 47073482)
25. Ciatto S, Visioli C, Paci E, Zappa M. Breast density as a determinant of interval cancer at mammographic screening. Br J Cancer 2004; 90: 393-396. (Pubitemid 38250634)
26. Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, et al. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000; 21: 325-336.
27. Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001; 221: 641-649.
28. 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: 165-175.
29. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A, et al. Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. Eur J Cancer 2008; 44: 539-544.
30. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2008; 299: 2151-2163.
31. Taylor P, Potts HWW. Computer aids and human second reading as interventions in screening mammography: two systematic reviews to compare effects on cancer detection and recall rate. Eur J Cancer 2008; 44: 798-807.
32. Houssami N, Given-Wilson R, Ciatto S. Overview of the evidence on computer-aided detection (CAD) in mammography screening. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2009. In press.
33. Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Gillan MGC, et al (for the CADET II Group). Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 1675-1684.