Literature DB >> 18030441

[Mammography screening in Germany].

S Diekmann1, F Diekmann.   

Abstract

Available data suggest that early detection of breast cancer by mammography screening can reduce mortality by about 25%. Intensified monitoring of women with a family history of breast cancer and regular general screening have recently been introduced in Germany. The screening program is expected to be fully established by 2008. Following its successful introduction (participation rates between 65 and 80%), the German screening program will be conducted and evaluated in accordance with the European guidelines. At least in the screening trials that were conducted prior to the now established screening program the quality criteria were more than fulfilled (e.g. cancer detection rate in Bremen 8.7, Wiesbaden 9.4, Weser-Ems region 8.3/1000). Additional parameters that can be taken into account for quality assurance are the overdiagnosis bias, lead time bias, length bias and selection bias. Moreover, there are some factors that are specific to the German program compared with the breast cancer screening programs already established in other countries. One of these is the intensified screening program for high-risk women (ca. 5% of all carcinomas) and as a result fewer women with an increased genetic risk of breast cancer will be represented in the general screening program. The German screening program involves only a few university centers and hospital-based physicians, which may have adverse effects on research and development as well as mammography training in the future. Therefore, the screening program should also provide for the investigation of new techniques or emerging techniques (e.g. CAD systems in screening mammography) in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18030441     DOI: 10.1007/s00117-007-1558-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiologe        ISSN: 0033-832X            Impact factor:   0.635


  32 in total

1.  Combination of digital mammography with semi-automated 3D breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Ajay Kapur; Paul L Carson; Jeffrey Eberhard; Mitchell M Goodsitt; Kai Thomenius; Murtuza Lokhandwalla; Donald Buckley; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Mark A Helvie; Rebecca C Booi; Gerald L LeCarpentier; Ramon Q Erkamp; Heang-Ping Chan; J Brian Fowlkes; Jerry A Thomas; Cynthia E Landberg
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2004-08

2.  A study on two different CAD systems for mammography as an aid to radiological diagnosis in the search of microcalcification clusters.

Authors:  A Lauria; R Palmiero; G Forni; M E Fantacci; M Imbriaco; A Sodano; P L Indovina
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2004-11-28       Impact factor: 3.528

Review 3.  Does the accuracy of single reading with CAD (computer-aided detection) compare with that of double reading?: A review of the literature.

Authors:  R L Bennett; R G Blanks; S M Moss
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.350

4.  [Quality assurance by improved cooperation structures. The example of decentralized early detection mammography].

Authors:  E Swart; B P Robra; M L Dierks; H J Frischbier; W Hoeffken
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  1995-10       Impact factor: 2.915

5.  Characterization of benign and malignant breast lesions with computed tomography laser mammography (CTLM): initial experience.

Authors:  Daniel Floery; Thomas H Helbich; Christopher C Riedl; Silvia Jaromi; Michael Weber; Sepp Leodolter; Michael H Fuchsjaeger
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 6.016

Review 6.  Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Talya Salz; Sarah E Lillie
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2007-04-03       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Cancers detected and induced, and associated risk and benefit, in a breast screening programme.

Authors:  J Law; K Faulkner
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience.

Authors:  Roberta A Jong; Martin J Yaffe; Mia Skarpathiotakis; Rene S Shumak; Nathalie M Danjoux; Anoma Gunesekara; Donald B Plewes
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-07-24       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer.

Authors:  Constance D Lehman; Constantine Gatsonis; Christiane K Kuhl; R Edward Hendrick; Etta D Pisano; Lucy Hanna; Sue Peacock; Stanley F Smazal; Daniel D Maki; Thomas B Julian; Elizabeth R DePeri; David A Bluemke; Mitchell D Schnall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  2 in total

1.  The Future of Breast Cancer Diagnostics.

Authors:  Felix Diekmann; Susanne Diekmann
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2008-12-05       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  Recent Trends in Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Germany.

Authors:  Alexander Katalinic; Ron Pritzkuleit; Annika Waldmann
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2009-04-24       Impact factor: 2.860

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.