Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: A systematic review for the U.S. Preventive services task force

Annals of Internal Medicine

Volumn 164, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 268-278

  Melnikow, Joy ^a   Fenton, Joshua J ^a   Whitlock, Evelyn P ^b   Miglioretti, Diana L ^c   Weyrich, Meghan S ^a   Thompson, Jamie H ^b   Shah, Kunal ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CENTER FOR HEALTH RESEARCH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d 6380 Lerner Hall ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN;

ACUTE KIDNEY FAILURE; BREAST CANCER; BREAST DENSITY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; DISTRESS SYNDROME; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; META ANALYSIS; NEPHROGENIC SYSTEMIC FIBROSIS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATIENT WORRY; POSTMENOPAUSE; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RELIABILITY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TUMOR INVASION; UNITED STATES; ADULT; AGED; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONGENITAL MALFORMATION; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; MAMMARY GLAND; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; PROCEDURES; RISK FACTOR;

ADULT; AGED; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMARY GLANDS, HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; RISK FACTORS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 84958752692     PISSN: 00034819     EISSN: 15393704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7326/M15-1789     Document Type: Review

References (51)

1. Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, BurtV, Trentham-Dietz A, Hampton JM, Wellman RD, et al. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106. [PMID: 25217577] doi:10.1093/jnci/dju255
2. Carmona-Sanchez E, Cuadros Lopez JL, Cuadros Celorrio AM, Perez-Roncero G, Gonzalez Ramírez AR, Fernandez Alonso AM. Assessment of mammographic density in postmenopausal women during long term hormone replacement therapy. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29:1067-70. [PMID: 24004297] doi:10.3109/09513590.2013.831831
3. del Carmen MG, Hughes KS, Halpern E, Rafferty E, Kopans D, Parisky YR, et al. Racial differences in mammographic breast density. Cancer. 2003;98:590-6. [PMID: 12879477]
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Breast cancer rates by race and ethnicity. 2014. Accessed at www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/statistics/race.htm on 3 March 2015.
5. Gierach GL, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K, Brinton LA, Farhat GN, Vacek PM, et al. Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:1218-27. [PMID: 22911616] doi:10.1093/jnci/djs327
6. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, Evans P, Monsees B, Monticciolo D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mam-mography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7:18-27. [PMID: 20129267] doi:10.1016/j.jacr.2009.09.022
7. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 2014. Accessed at www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/pdf/breast-screening.pdf on 10 October 2014.
8. American Cancer Society. American Cancer Society recommendations for early breast cancer detection in women without breast symptoms. 2014. Accessed at www.cancer.org/cancer/breastcancer/moreinformation/breastcancerearlydetection/breast-cancer-early-detection-acs-recs on 7 October 2014.
9. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion no. 593: Management of women with dense breasts diagnosed by mammography. Obstet Gynecol. 2014;123:910-1. [PMID: 24785636] doi:10.1097/01.AOG.0000445584.44898.7d
10. Are You Dense? D.E.N.S.E. State Efforts. 2015. Accessed at www.areyoudenseadvocacy.org/dense on 29 June 2015.
11. Illinois General Assembly. (215 ILCS 5/356g) Sec. 356g. Mammo-grams; mastectomies. Accessed at www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/documents/021500050k356g.htm on 10 October 2014.
12. 118th General Assembly of the State of Indiana. Senate Enrolled Act No. 414. 2013. Accessed at www.in.gov/legislative/bills/2013/PDF/SE/SE0414.1.pdf on 29 June 2015.
13. The State of Connecticut. Public Act No. 09-41. An Act Requiring Communication of Mammographic Breast Density Information to Patients. 2009. Accessed at www.cga.ct.gov/2009/ACT/PA/2009PA-00041-R00SB-00458-PA.htm on 10 October 2015.
14. New Jersey 215th Legislature. An Act Concerning Mammo-grams, amending P.L.1991, c.279 and P.L.2004, c.86, and supplementing Title 26 of the Revised Statutes and P.L.2003, c.193. 2014. Accessed at www.njleg.state.nj.us/2012/Bills/PL13/196-.PDF on 10 October 2014.
15. Breast Density and Mammography Reporting Act of 2015. 114th Congress of the United States ed. 2015. Accessed at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/370 on 10 October 2014.
16. Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock E, Miglioretti DL, Weyrich M, Thompson J, et al. Adjunctive Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Evidence Synthesis No. 126. AHRQ Publication No. 14-05201-EF-2. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
17. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Procedure Manual. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013.
18. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The Guidelines Manual. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2006.
19. Lucas NP, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Bogduk N. The development of a quality appraisal tool for studies of diagnostic reliability (QAREL). J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:854-61. [PMID: 20056381] doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.10.002
20. Harvey JA, Gard CC, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, Kerlikowske K, Buist DS, et al; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Reported mammographic density: film-screen versus digital acquisition. Radiology. 2013;266:752-8. [PMID: 23249570] doi:10.1148/radiol.12120221
21. Redondo A, Comas M, Macià F, Ferrer F, Murta-Nascimento C, Maristany MT, et al. Inter-and intraradiologist variability in the BI-RADS assessment and breast density categories for screening mam-mograms. Br J Radiol. 2012;85:1465-70. [PMID: 22993385] doi:10.1259/bjr/21256379
22. Spayne MC, Gard CC, Skelly J, Miglioretti DL, Vacek PM, Geller BM. Reproducibility of BI-RADS breast density measures among community radiologists: a prospective cohort study. Breast J. 2012;18:326-33. [PMID: 22607064] doi:10.1111/j.1524-4741.2012.01250.x
23. Bernardi G, Cavallaro G, Indinnimeo M, Fiore A, Basso L, D'Ermo G, et al. Usefulness of ultrasounds in the management of breast phyllodes tumors. G Chir. 2012;33:81-5. [PMID: 22525552]
24. Gard CC, Aiello Bowles EJ, Miglioretti DL, Taplin SH, Rutter CM. Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) mammographic density and implications for breast density reporting legislation. Breast J. 2015;21:481-9. [PMID: 26133090] doi: 10.1111/tbj.12443
25. Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, Jong RA, Pisano ED, Barr RG, et al; ACRIN 6666 Investigators. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA. 2012;307:1394-404. [PMID: 22474203] doi:10.1001/jama.2012.388
26. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M, Ferrari A, Speziani M, Bella-rosa S, et al. Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47:1021-6. [PMID: 21211962] doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.12.002
27. Brancato B, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, Iacconi C, Risso G, Taschini R, et al. Negligible advantages and excess costs of routine addition of breast ultrasonography to mammography in dense breasts. Tumori. 2007;93:562-6. [PMID: 18338490]
28. Girardi V, Tonegutti M, Ciatto S, Bonetti F. Breast ultrasound in 22, 131 asymptomatic women with negative mammography. Breast. 2013;22:806-9. [PMID: 23558244] doi:10.1016/j.breast.2013.02.010
29. Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology. 2012;265:59-69. [PMID: 22723501]
30. Leong LC, Gogna A, Pant R, Ng FC, Sim LS. Supplementary breast ultrasound screening in Asian women with negative but dense mammograms-a pilot study. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2012; 41:432-9. [PMID: 23138139]
31. Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J. 2013;19:64-70. [PMID: 23240937] doi:10.1111/tbj.12053
32. Venturini E, Losio C, Panizza P, Rodighiero MG, Fedele I, Tac-chini S, et al. Tailored breast cancer screening program with micro-dose mammography, US, and MR Imaging: short-term results of a pilot study in 40-49-year-old women. Radiology. 2013;268:347-55. [PMID: 23579052] doi:10.1148/radiol.13122278
33. Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The Connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2012;18:517-22. [PMID: 23009208] doi:10.1111/tbj.12003
34. Youk JH, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Kwak JY, Son EJ. Performance of hand-held whole-breast ultrasound based on BI-RADS in women with mammographically negative dense breast. Eur Radiol. 2011; 21:667-75. [PMID: 20853108] doi:10.1007/s00330-010-1955-8
35. Brem RF, Tabár L, Duffy SW, Inciardi MF, Guingrich JA, Hashimoto BE, et al. Assessing improvement in detection of breast cancer with three-dimensional automated breast US in women with dense breast tissue: the SomoInsight Study. Radiology. 2015;274: 663-73. [PMID: 25329763] doi:10.1148/radiol.14132832
36. Giuliano V, Giuliano C. Improved breast cancer detection in asymptomatic women using 3D-automated breast ultrasound in mammographically dense breasts. Clin Imaging. 2013;37:480-6. [PMID: 23116728] doi:10.1016/j.clinimag.2012.09.018
37. Kelly KM, Dean J, Comulada WS, Lee SJ. Breast cancer detection using automated whole breast ultrasound and mammography in ra-diographically dense breasts. Eur Radiol. 2010;20:734-42. [PMID: 19727744] doi:10.1007/s00330-009-1588-y
38. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Obdeijn IM, Boetes C, Zonderland HM, Muller SH, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;100:109-19. [PMID: 16791481]
39. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers RD, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2304-10. [PMID: 24958821] doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.52.5386
40. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, Caumo F, Pellegrini M, Brunelli S, et al. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomo-synthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:583-9. [PMID: 23623721] doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70134-7
41. Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology. 2013; 269:694-700. [PMID: 23901124] doi:10.1148/radiol.13130307
42. McCarthy AM, Kontos D, Synnestvedt M, Tan KS, Heitjan DF, Schnall M, et al. Screening outcomes following implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis in a general-population screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106. [PMID: 25313245] doi:10.1093/jnci/dju316
43. Rose SL, Tidwell AL, Bujnoch LJ, Kushwaha AC, Nordmann AS, Sexton R Jr. Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:1401-8. [PMID: 23701081] doi:10.2214/AJR.12.9672
44. Bottorff JL, Ratner PA, Johnson JL, Hislop TG, Buxton JA, Zeisser C, et al. Women's responses to information on mammographic breast density. Can J Nurs Res. 2007;39:38-57. [PMID: 17450704]
45. Nelson HD, Cantor A, Humphrey L, Fu R, Pappas M, Daeges M, et al. Screening for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review to Update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Evidence Synthesis No. 124. AHRQ Publication No. 14-05201-EF-1. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
46. Besheli LD, Aran S, Shaqdan K, Kay J, Abujudeh H. Current status of nephrogenic systemic fibrosis. Clin Radiol. 2014;69:661-8.
47. Miglioretti DL, Lange J, van Ravesteyn N, van den Broek JJ, Lee CI, Melnikow J, et al. Radiation-Induced Breast Cancer and Breast Cancer Death From Mammography Screening. AHRQ Publication No. 14-05201-EF-5. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2015.
48. American College of Radiology. ACR statement on reporting breast density in mammography reports and patient summaries. 24 April 2012. Accessed at www.acr.org/About-Us/Media-Center/Position-Statements/Position-Statements-Folder/Statement-on-Reporting-Breast-Density-in-Mammography-Reports-and-Patient-Summaries on 24 April 2013.
49. Gur D, Zuley ML, Anello MI, Rathfon GY, Chough DM, Ganott MA, et al. Dose reduction in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening using synthetically reconstructed projection images: an observer performance study. Acad Radiol. 2012;19:166-71. [PMID: 22098941] doi:10.1016/j.acra.2011.10.003
50. Feng SS, Sechopoulos I. Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization. Radiology. 2012;263:35-42. [PMID: 22332070] doi:10.1148/radiol.11111789
51. Olgar T, Kahn T, Gosch D. Average glandular dose in digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis. Rofo. 2012;184:911-8. [PMID: 22711250]