The potential impact of risk-based screening mammography in women 40-49 years old

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 205, Issue 6, 2015, Pages 1360-1364

  Price, Elissa R ^a   Keedy, Alexander W ^b   Gidwaney, Rita ^c   Sickles, Edward A ^a   Joe, Bonnie N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b KAISER PERMANENTE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c CITY OF HOPE NATIONAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Breast density; Family history; Risk based screening

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR;

ADULT; ADULTHOOD; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; TUMOR INVASION; WOMEN'S HEALTH; BREAST TUMOR; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; GENETICS; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; LYMPHATIC METASTASIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84948733762     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: 15463141     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.15.14668     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Siegel R, Ma J, Zou Z, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64:9-29
2. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer facts & figures 2013-2014. www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/document/acspc-042725.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed June 17, 2015
3. Tabár 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 2003; 361:1405-1410
4. Tabár 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; 1:829-832
5. Duffy SW, Tabár L, Chen HH, et al. The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties. Cancer 2002; 95:458-469
6. 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; 15:45-51
7. 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; 117:714-722
8. Otto SJ, Fracheboud J, Looman CW, et al. Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breastcancer mortality: a systematic review. Lancet 2003; 361:1411-1417
9. Hendrick RE, Smith RA, Rutledge JH III, Smart CR. Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40-49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997; 22:87-92
10. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:727-737, W237-W242
11. 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; 260:658-663
12. Jonsson H, Bordas P, Wallin H, Nystrom L, Lenner P. Service screening with mammography in Northern Sweden: effects on breast cancer mortality-an update. J Med Screen 2007; 14:87-93
13. Andersson I, Janzon L. Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: updated results from the Malmo Mammographic Screening Program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 1997; 22:63-67
14. Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH III, Smith RA. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 years: current evidence from randomized controlled trials. Cancer 1995; 75:1619-1626
15. Bjurstam N, Bjorneld L, Duffy SW, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39-49 years at randomization. Cancer 1997; 80:2091-2099
16. Coldman A, Phillips N, Warren L, Kan L. Breast cancer mortality after screening mammography in British Columbia women. Int J Cancer 2007; 120:1076-1080
17. 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:dju261 [Erratum in J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:dju404]
18. Malmgren JA, Parikh J, Atwood MK, Kaplan HG. Impact of mammography detection on the course of breast cancer in women aged 40-49 years. Radiology 2012; 262:797-806
19. Plecha D, Salem N, Kremer M, et al. Neglecting to screen women between 40 and 49 years old with mammography: what is the impact on treatment morbidity and potential risk reduction? AJR 2014; 202:282-288
20. Kremer ME, Downs-Holmes C, Novak RD, et al. Neglecting to screen women between the ages of 40 and 49 years with mammography: what is the impact on breast cancer diagnosis? AJR 2012; 198:1218-1222
21. Shen N, Hammonds LS, Madsen D, Dale P. Mammography in 40-year-old women: what difference does it make? The potential impact of the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) mammography guidelines. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18:3066-3071
22. United States Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:716-726, W-236 [Errata in Ann Intern Med 2010; 152:199-200 and Ann Intern Med 2010; 152:688]
23. Schousboe JT, Kerlikowske K, Loh A, Cummings SR. Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med 2011; 155:10-20
24. van Ravesteyn NT, Miglioretti DL, Stout NK, et al. Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156:609-617
25. Schrager S, Marko K. Mammography at age 40? A risk-based strategy. J Fam Pract 2013; 62:630-638
26. Qaseem A, Snow V, Sherif K, Aronson M, Weiss KB, Owens DK. Screening mammography for women 40 to 49 years of age: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2007; 146:511-515
27. 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; 133:855-863
28. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Eaton A, Ernster V. Positive predictive value of screening mammography by age and family history of breast cancer. JAMA 1993; 270:2444-2450
29. Vilaprinyo E, Forne C, Carles M, et al. Cost-effectiveness and harm-benefit analyses of riskbased screening strategies for breast cancer. PLoS ONE 2014; 9:e86858
30. Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87:670-675
31. 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
32. Kharazmi E, Chen T, Narod S, Sundquist K, Hemminki K. Effect of multiplicity, laterality, and age at onset of breast cancer on familial risk of breast cancer: a nationwide prospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2014; 144:185-192
33. D'Orsi CJ, Sickles EA, Mendelson EB, et al. ACR BI-RADS Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2013
34. Caudle AS, Yu TK, Tucker SL, et al. Local-regional control according to surrogate markers of breast cancer subtypes and response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving therapy. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14:R83
35. Lobbezoo DJ, van Kampen RJ, Voogd AC, et al. Prognosis of metastatic breast cancer subtypes: the hormone receptor/HER2-positive subtype is associated with the most favorable outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 141:507-514
36. Panoff JE, Hurley J, Takita C, et al. Risk of locoregional recurrence by receptor status in breast cancer patients receiving modern systemic therapy and post-mastectomy radiation. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 128:899-906
37. Parise CA, Bauer KR, Brown MM, Caggiano V. Breast cancer subtypes as defined by the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) among women with invasive breast cancer in California, 1999-2004. Breast J 2009; 15:593-602
38. Nelson HD, Zakher B, Cantor A, et al. Risk factors for breast cancer for women aged 40 to 49 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2012; 156:635-648
39. Sickles EA. The use of breast imaging to screen women at high risk for cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2010; 48:859-878
40. Price ER, Hargreaves J, Lipson JA, et al.; The California Breast Density Information Group. A collaborative response to the issues of breast density, breast cancer risk, and breast density notification legislation. Radiology 2013; 269:887-892
41. Destounis SV, Arieno AL, Morgan RC, et al. Comparison of breast cancers diagnosed in screening patients in their 40s with and without family history of breast cancer in a community outpatient facility. AJR 2014; 202:928-932
42. Arleo EK, Dashevsky BZ, Reichman M, Babagbemi K, Drotman M, Rosenblatt R. Screening mammography for women in their 40s: a retrospective study of the potential impact of the U.S. Preventive Service Task Force's 2009 breast cancer screening recommendations. AJR 2013; 201:1401-1406
43. Curpen BN, Sickles EA, Sollitto RA, Ominsky SH, Galvin HB, Frankel SD. The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old. AJR 1995; 164:1099-1103