Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 Guideline update from the American cancer society

JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association

Volumn 314, Issue 15, 2015, Pages 1599-1614

  Oeffinger, Kevin C ^a   Fontham, Elizabeth T H ^b   Etzioni, Ruth ^c   Herzig, Abbe ^d   Michaelson, James S ^e   Shih, Ya Chen Tina ^f   Walter, Louise C ^g   Church, Timothy R ^h   Flowers, Christopher R ⁱ   LaMonte, Samuel J ^j   Wolf, Andrew M D ^k   DeSantis, Carol ^l   Lortet Tieulent, Joannie ^l   Andrews, Kimberly ^l   Manassaram Baptiste, Deana ^l   Saslow, Debbie ^l   Smith, Robert A ^l   Brawley, Otis W ^l   Wender, Richard ^l  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^b Department of Oral and Craniofacial Biology   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^d Patient Advocate   (United States)

^e HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

ⁱ EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^j Independent Retired Physician and Patient Advocate   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^l AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE DISTRIBUTION; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POPULATION RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PREMATURE MORTALITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; WOMEN'S HEALTH; ADULT; AGE; BREAST TUMOR; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; LITERATURE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; RISK; STANDARDS;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; RISK;

EID: 84944590445     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: 15383598     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.12783     Document Type: Review

References (122)

1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(2):87-108.
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2015;65(1):5-29.
3. Howlander N, Noone A, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2012. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2015.
4. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al; Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) Collaborators. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1784-1792.
5. Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, et al; American Cancer Society High-Risk Work Group; American Cancer Society Screening Older Women Work Group; American Cancer Society Mammography Work Group; American Cancer Society Physical Examination Work Group; American Cancer Society New Technologies Work Group; American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003;53 (3):141-169.
6. Institute of Medicine. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011.
7. Institute of Medicine. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011.
8. Brawley O, Byers T, Chen A, et al. New American Cancer Society process for creating trustworthy cancer screening guidelines. JAMA. 2011;306(22): 2495-2499.
9. Samson D, Schoelles KM. Developing the topic and structuring systematic reviews of medical tests: utility of PICOTS, analytic frameworks, decision trees, and other frameworks. Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews. AHRQ publication 12-EHC017. http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq .gov/reports/final.cfm. Accessed September 24, 2015.
10. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1, Introduction: GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):383-394.
11. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al; GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490.
12. Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14, Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):719-725.
13. Andrews JC, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 15, Going from evidence to recommendations: determinants of a recommendation's direction and strength. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(7):726-735.
14. DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Mariotto AB, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin. 2014;64(4):252-271.
15. Sprague BL, Trentham-Dietz A. Prevalence of breast carcinoma in situ in the United States. JAMA. 2009;302(8):846-848.
16. Nelson HD, Pappas M, Zakher B, et al. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer in women: a systematic review to update the US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160 (4):255-266.
17. Ozanne EM, Drohan B, Bosinoff P, et al. Which risk model to use? clinical implications of the ACS MRI screening guidelines. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22(1):146-149.
18. Henderson TO, Amsterdam A, Bhatia S, et al. Systematic review: surveillance for breast cancer in women treated with chest radiation for childhood, adolescent, or young adult cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(7):444-455,W144-454.
19. Holm J, Humphreys K, Li J, et al. Risk factors and tumor characteristics of interval cancers by mammographic density. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(9): 1030-1037.
20. Hartmann LC, Degnim AC, Santen RJ, Dupont WD, Ghosh K. Atypical hyperplasia of the breast: risk assessment and management options. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(1):78-89.
21. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(3):227-236.
22. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al; American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):75-89.
23. Systematic review of cancer screening literature for updating American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines. Duke Evidence Synthesis Group. http://www.cancer.org/breastcancerevidencereport. Accessed September 28, 2015.
24. Hackshaw A. The benefits and harms of mammographic screening for breast cancer: building the evidence base using service screening programmes. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):1-2.
25. Myers ER, Moorman P, Gierisch JM, et al. Benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: a systematic review. JAMA. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.13183.
26. White E, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Biennial versus annual mammography and the risk of late-stage breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004;96(24):1832-1839.
27. Wilson J, Jungner G. Principles and Practice of Screening for Disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1968.
28. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Deaths: Final Data for 2011. Vol 63. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2014.
29. Broeders M, Moss S, Nyström L, et al; EUROSCREEN Working Group. The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of observational studies. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):14-25.
30. Gøtzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;6:CD001877.
31. Independent UK Panel on Breast Cancer Screening. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Lancet. 2012; 380(9855):1778-1786.
32. Tonelli M, Connor Gorber S, Joffres M, et al; Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Recommendations on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women aged 40-74 years. CMAJ. 2011;183(17):1991-2001.
33. Tabar L, Vitak B, Yen MF, et al. Number needed to screen: lives saved over 20 years of follow-up in mammographic screening. J Med Screen. 2004;11 (3):126-129.
34. Duffy SW, Chen TH, Smith RA, et al. Real and artificial controversies in breast cancer screening: a perspective article. Breast Cancer Manag. 2013;2 (6):519-528.
35. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the US Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):727-737.
36. Tabár L, Vitak B, Chen TH, et al. Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology. 2011;260(3):658-663.
37. Hubbard RA, Kerlikowske K, Flowers CI, et al. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):481-492.
38. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Hubbard RA, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(9):807-816.
39. Olsen AH, Agbaje OF, Myles JP, Lynge E, Duffy SW. Overdiagnosis, sojourn time, and sensitivity in the Copenhagen mammography screening program. Breast J. 2006;12(4):338-342.
40. Paci E, Miccinesi G, Puliti D, et al. Estimate of overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography after adjustment for lead time. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8(6):R68.
41. Duffy SW, Agbaje O, Tabar L, et al. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: estimates of overdiagnosis from two trials of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7(6):258-265.
42. Puliti D, Duffy SW, Miccinesi G, et al; EUROSCREEN Working Group. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review. J Med Screen. 2012;19 (suppl 1):42-56.
43. Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends. BMJ. 2009;339:b2587.
44. Zahl PH, Strand BH, Maehlen J. Incidence of breast cancer in Norway and Sweden during introduction of nationwide screening: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2004;328(7445):921-924.
45. de Gelder R, Heijnsdijk EA, van Ravesteyn NT, et al. Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):111-121.
46. 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(12):1129-1138.
47. Etzioni R, Gulati R, Mallinger L, Mandelblatt J. Influence of study features and methods on overdiagnosis estimates in breast and prostate cancer screening. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(11):831-838.
48. Duffy SW, Parmar D. Overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening: the importance of length of observation period and lead time. Breast Cancer Res. 2013;15(3):R41.
49. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(21):1998-2005.
50. Helvie MA, Chang JT, Hendrick RE, Banerjee M. Reduction in late-stage breast cancer incidence in the mammography era: implications for overdiagnosis of invasive cancer. Cancer. 2014;120 (17):2649-2656.
51. Carles M, Vilaprinyo E, Cots F, et al. Cost-effectiveness of early detection of breast cancer in Catalonia (Spain). BMC Cancer. 2011;11:192.
52. Stout NK, Rosenberg MA, Trentham-Dietz A, et al. Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98(11):774-782.
53. Pataky R, Ismail Z, Coldman AJ, et al. Cost-effectiveness of annual versus biennial screening mammography for women with high mammographic breast density. J Med Screen. 2014; 21(4):180-188.
54. Souza FH, Polanczyk CA. Is age-targeted full-field digital mammography screening cost-effective in emerging countries? a micro simulation model. Springerplus. 2013;2:366.
55. de Gelder R, Bulliard JL, de Wolf C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic versus organised mammography screening in Switzerland. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(1):127-138.
56. Lee CI, Cevik M, Alagoz O, et al. Comparative effectiveness of combined digital mammography and tomosynthesis screening for women with dense breasts. Radiology. 2015;274(3):772-780.
57. Stout NK, Lee SJ, Schechter CB, et al. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(6):dju092.
58. Raftery J, Chorozoglou M. Possible net harms of breast cancer screening: updated modelling of Forrest report. BMJ. 2011;343:d7627.
59. de Haes JC, de Koning HJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, et al. The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality-adjusted life-years. Int J Cancer. 1991;49(4):538-544.
60. Tosteson AN, Fryback DG, Hammond CS, et al. Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(6):954-961.
61. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L. Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press; 1988.
62. Nelson HD, Fu R, Griffin JC, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer. Ann Intern Med.2009;151(10):703-715, W-226-W-235.
63. Coldman A, Phillips N, Wilson C, et al. Pan-Canadian study of mammography screening and mortality from breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106(11):dju261.
64. Swedish Organised Service Screening Evaluation Group. Reduction in breast cancer mortality from organized service screening with mammography: 1, further confirmation with extended data. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15(1):45-51.
65. Nelson HD, Cantor A, Humphrey L, et al. Screening for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review to Update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
66. de Koning HJ, Boer R, Warmerdam PG, et al. Quantitative interpretation of age-specific mortality reductions from the Swedish breast cancer-screening trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995;87 (16):1217-1223.
67. Tabár L, Duffy SW, Chen HH. Re: Quantitative interpretation of age-specific mortality reductions from the Swedish Breast Cancer-Screening Trials. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1996;88(1):52-55.
68. Hellquist BN, Duffy SW, Abdsaleh S, et al. Effectiveness of population-based service screening with mammography for women ages 40 to 49 years: evaluation of the Swedish Mammography Screening in Young Women (SCRY) cohort. Cancer. 2011;117(4):714-722.
69. Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S, et al; Breast Cancer Working Group of the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10): 738-747.
70. Tabár L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? an analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987;55(5):547-551.
71. Michaelson J, Satija S, Moore R, et al. The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences. Cancer. 2002;94(1):37-43.
72. Michaelson JS, Satija S, Kopans D, et al. Gauging the impact of breast carcinoma screening in terms of tumor size and death rate. Cancer. 2003;98(10): 2114-2124.
73. Blanchard K, Colbert JA, Puri D, et al. Mammographic screening: patterns of use and estimated impact on breast carcinoma survival. Cancer. 2004;101(3):495-507.
74. Miglioretti D, Zhu W, Kerlikowske K, et al. Breast tumor prognostic characteristics and biennial vs annual mammography, age, and menopausal status. JAMA Oncol. doi:10.1001 /jamaoncol.2015.3084.
75. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155(8):493-502.
76. Gold EB, Crawford SL, Avis NE, et al. Factors related to age at natural menopause: longitudinal analyses from SWAN. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;178(1): 70-83.
77. Performance measures for 1,838,372 screening mammography examinations from 2004 to 2008 by age: based on BCSC data through 2009. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. http: //breastscreening.cancer.gov/statistics /performance/screening/2009/perf-age.html. Accessed July 15, 2015.
78. Jonsson H, Bordás P, Wallin H, et al. Service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden: effects on breast cancer mortality: an update. J Med Screen. 2007;14(2):87-93.
79. Roder D, 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(3): 409-416.
80. Braithwaite D, Zhu W, Hubbard RA, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Screening outcomes in older US women undergoing multiple mammograms in community practice: does interval, age, or comorbidity score affect tumor characteristics or false positive rates? J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(5):334-341.
81. Sima CS, Panageas KS, Schrag D. Cancer screening among patients with advanced cancer. JAMA. 2010;304(14):1584-1591.
82. Tan A, Kuo YF, Goodwin JS. Potential overuse of screening mammography and its association with access to primary care. Med Care. 2014;52(6): 490-495.
83. Walter LC, Eng C, Covinsky KE. Screening mammography for frail older women: what are the burdens? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16(11):779-784.
84. Sox HC. Screening for disease in older people. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13(6):424-425.
85. Raik BL, Miller FG, Fins JJ. Screening and cognitive impairment: ethics of forgoing mammography in older women. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2004;52(3):440-444.
86. De Glas NA, Kiderlen M, Bastiaannet E, et al. Postoperative complications and survival of elderly breast cancer patients: a FOCUS study analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;138(2):561-569.
87. Hurria A, Browner IS, Cohen HJ, et al. Senior adult oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2012;10 (2):162-209.
88. Dijkstra JB, Houx PJ, Jolles J. Cognition after major surgery in the elderly: test performance and complaints. Br J Anaesth. 1999;82(6):867-874.
89. Walter LC, Schonberg MA. Screening mammography in older women: a review. JAMA. 2014;311(13):1336-1347.
90. Walter LC, Covinsky KE. Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making. JAMA. 2001;285(21):2750-2756.
91. Yourman LC, Lee SJ, Schonberg MA, Widera EW, Smith AK. Prognostic indices for older adults: a systematic review. JAMA. 2012;307(2):182-192.
92. Lee SJ, Smith AK, Widera EW, Yourman LC, Schonberg MA, Ahalt C. Eprognosis: Estimating prognosis for elders. http://www.eprognosis.org. Accessed September 29, 2015.
93. Bobo J, Lee N. Factors associated with accurate cancer detection during a clinical breast examination. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(7):463.
94. McDonald S, Saslow D, Alciati MH. Performance and reporting of clinical breast examination: a review of the literature. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004;54(6):345-361.
95. Bancej C, Decker K, Chiarelli A, et al. Contribution of clinical breast examination to mammography screening in the early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen. 2003;10(1):16-21.
96. Habbema JD, Wilt TJ, Etzioni R, et al. Models in the development of clinical practice guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2014;161(11):812-818.
97. Tabár L, Yen AM, Wu WY, et al. Insights from the breast cancer screening trials: how screening affects the natural history of breast cancer and implications for evaluating service screening programs. Breast J. 2015;21(1):13-20.
98. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist G, et al. GRADE guidelines: 4, rating the quality of evidence: study limitations (risk of bias). J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64 (4):407-415.
99. Moss SM, Nyström L, Jonsson H, et al; Euroscreen Working Group. The impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality in Europe: a review of trend studies. J Med Screen. 2012;19(suppl 1):26-32.
100. Verbeek AL, van Dijck JA, Broeders MJ. The effect of cancer screening on mortality: the case-control study as evaluation method [in Dutch]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2014;158(0):A7047.
101. Welch HG. Screening mammography: a long run for a short slide? N Engl J Med. 2010;363(13): 1276-1278.
102. Otto SJ, Fracheboud J, Looman CW, et al; National Evaluation Team for Breast Cancer Screening. Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review. Lancet. 2003;361(9367):1411-1417.
103. Vervoort MM, Draisma G, Fracheboud J, van de Poll-Franse LV, de Koning HJ. Trends in the usage of adjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer in the Netherlands and its effect on mortality. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(2):242-247.
104. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA. 2014;311(24):2499-2507.
105. Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, et al; DMIST Investigators Group. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 2008;246(2):376-383.
106. Mulder RL, Kremer LC, Hudson MM, et al; International Late Effects of Childhood Cancer Guideline Harmonization Group. Recommendations for breast cancer surveillance for female survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer given chest radiation. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(13): e621-e629.
107. Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis (version 1.2015) [login required]. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls /PDF/breast-screening.pdf. Accessed September 28, 2015.
108. Houssami N, Abraham LA, Kerlikowske K, et al. Risk factors for second screen-detected or interval breast cancers in women with a personal history of breast cancer participating in mammography screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22(5):946-961.
109. Chiu SY, Duffy S, Yen AM, Tabár L, Smith RA, Chen HH. Effect of baseline breast density on breast cancer incidence, stage, mortality, and screening parameters: 25-year follow-up of a Swedish mammographic screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(5):1219-1228.
110. Boyd NF, Huszti E, Melnichouk O, et al. Mammographic features associated with interval breast cancers in screening programs. Breast Cancer Res. 2014;16(4):417.
111. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer. 2013;108(11):2205-2240.
112. Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ [published online August 20, 2015]. JAMA Oncol. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2510.
113. Esserman L, Yau C. Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment [published online August 20, 2015]. JAMA Oncol. doi:10.1001 /jamaoncol.2015.2607.
114. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000;320(7250):1635-1640.
115. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ Jr, Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA. 2004;291(1):71-78.
116. Allen JD, Bluethmann SM, Sheets M, et al. Women's responses to changes in US Preventive Task Force's mammography screening guidelines: results of focus groups with ethnically diverse women. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1169.
117. Thomson MD, Siminoff LA. Perspectives on mammography after receipt of secondary screening owing to a false positive. Womens Health Issues. 2015;25(2):128-133.
118. Buist DS, Anderson ML, Smith RA, et al. Effect of radiologists' diagnostic work-up volume on interpretive performance. Radiology. 2014;273(2): 351-364.
119. Assessing and improving imaging interpretation in breast cancer screening. Institute of Medicine. http://iom.nationalacademies.org/Activities/Disease/NCPF/2015-MAY-12.aspx#sthash .BiDFaY5P.dpuf. Accessed August 10, 2015.
120. Anderson RT, Yang TC, Matthews SA, et al. Breast cancer screening, area deprivation, and later-stage breast cancer in Appalachia: does geography matter? Health Serv Res. 2014;49(2): 546-567.
121. Brown ML, Klabunde CN, Cronin KA, et al. Challenges in meeting Healthy People 2020 objectives for cancer-related preventive services, National Health Interview Survey, 2008 and 2010. Prev Chronic Dis. 2014;11:E29.
122. Elkin EB, Paige Nobles J, Pinheiro LC, Atoria CL, Schrag D. Changes in access to screening mammography, 2008-2011. Cancer Causes Control. 2013;24(5):1057-1059.