Literature DB >> 22054804

Breast cancer risk assessment in 64,659 women at a single high-volume mammography clinic.

John T Brinton1, Lora D Barke, Mary E Freivogel, Stacy Jackson, Colin I O'Donnell, Deborah H Glueck.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: In 2007, the American Cancer Society (ACS) recommended that women at elevated risk of breast cancer be screened with breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an adjunct to mammography. This study estimates the proportion of women presenting for screening mammography who are at elevated lifetime risk of breast cancer as determined by the Gail model. This study provides preliminary information for a proposed follow-up study, including the proportion of women who completed the recommended MRI at the same clinic that had conducted the risk assessment.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is an observational prospective cohort of 64,659 women presenting for mammographic screening at a single high-volume clinic. If a woman reported a first-degree maternal relative with breast cancer and had at least 20% lifetime risk on the Gail model, the radiologist's report included a recommendation that the primary care physician refer the woman for breast MRI screening. Records were examined to determine if women completed the recommended MRI at the clinic within one year of the initial risk assessment.
RESULTS: Of 64,659 women, 1,246 (1.9%) had a lifetime risk of breast cancer of 20% or greater, and 436 (0.7 %) had a lifetime risk of breast cancer 25% or greater. Of the women at elevated risk, 173 (13.9%) completed the recommended breast MRI screening at the clinic within a year.
CONCLUSION: The effectiveness of matching screening intensity to risk on cancer detection, biopsy rate, and cost should be evaluated by studying multiple clinics and multiple risk assessment tools.
Copyright © 2012 AUR. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22054804      PMCID: PMC3261722          DOI: 10.1016/j.acra.2011.09.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Radiol        ISSN: 1076-6332            Impact factor:   3.173


  20 in total

1.  Predictors of perceived breast cancer risk and the relation between perceived risk and breast cancer screening: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  Maria C Katapodi; Kathy A Lee; Noreen C Facione; Marylin J Dodd
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.018

Review 2.  Reported drop in mammography : is this cause for concern?

Authors:  Nancy Breen; Kathleen A Cronin; Helen I Meissner; Stephen H Taplin; Florence K Tangka; Jasmin A Tiro; Timothy S McNeel
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 6.860

3.  Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40-49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  R E Hendrick; R A Smith; J H Rutledge; C R Smart
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  1997

4.  Probability of carrying a mutation of breast-ovarian cancer gene BRCA1 based on family history.

Authors:  D A Berry; G Parmigiani; J Sanchez; J Schildkraut; E Winer
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1997-02-05       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Determining carrier probabilities for breast cancer-susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Authors:  G Parmigiani; D Berry; O Aguilar
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually.

Authors:  M H Gail; L A Brinton; D P Byar; D K Corle; S B Green; C Schairer; J J Mulvihill
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1989-12-20       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 7.  Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Heidi D Nelson; Kari Tyne; Arpana Naik; Christina Bougatsos; Benjamin K Chan; Linda Humphrey
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer.

Authors:  Laura Esserman; Yiwey Shieh; Ian Thompson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  The American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with magnetic resonance imaging: an argument for genetic testing.

Authors:  Colleen D Murphy; Janie M Lee; Brian Drohan; David M Euhus; Daniel B Kopans; Michele A Gadd; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Michelle C Specht; Barbara L Smith; Kevin S Hughes
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme.

Authors:  E Amir; D G Evans; A Shenton; F Lalloo; A Moran; C Boggis; M Wilson; A Howell
Journal:  J Med Genet       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 6.318

View more
  10 in total

1.  Informing Women and Their Physicians about Recommendations for Adjunct Breast MRI Screening: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  John T Brinton; Lora D Barke; Mary E Freivogel; Tiffany C Talley; Michelle D Lexin; Alicia L Drew; Rachel B Beam; Deborah H Glueck
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2017-02-03

2.  Changes in breast cancer risk distribution among Vermont women using screening mammography.

Authors:  Kenyon C Bolton; John L Mace; Pamela M Vacek; Sally D Herschorn; Ted A James; Jeffrey A Tice; Karla Kerlikowske; Berta M Geller; Donald L Weaver; Brian L Sprague
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Differences between screen-detected and interval breast cancers among BRCA mutation carriers.

Authors:  Melissa Pilewskie; Emily C Zabor; Elizabeth Gilbert; Michelle Stempel; Oriana Petruolo; Debra Mangino; Mark Robson; Maxine S Jochelson
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Benign breast disease, mammographic breast density, and the risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey A Tice; Ellen S O'Meara; Donald L Weaver; Celine Vachon; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Factors associated with breast MRI use among women with a family history of breast cancer.

Authors:  Mary C White; Ashwini Soman; Clarice R Weinberg; Juan L Rodriguez; Susan A Sabatino; Lucy A Peipins; Lisa DeRoo; Hazel B Nichols; M Elizabeth Hodgson; Dale P Sandler
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2018-05-20       Impact factor: 2.431

6.  Disparities in the use of screening magnetic resonance imaging of the breast in community practice by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.

Authors:  Jennifer S Haas; Deirdre A Hill; Robert D Wellman; Rebecca A Hubbard; Christoph I Lee; Karen J Wernli; Natasha K Stout; Anna N A Tosteson; Louise M Henderson; Jennifer A Alford-Teaster; Tracy L Onega
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Underutilization of Supplemental Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Among Patients at High Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Randy Miles; Fei Wan; Tracy L Onega; Amanda Lenderink-Carpenter; Ellen S O'Meara; Weiwei Zhu; Louise M Henderson; Jennifer S Haas; Deirdre A Hill; Anna N A Tosteson; Karen J Wernli; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Janie M Lee; Constance D Lehman; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 2.681

8.  Patterns of breast magnetic resonance imaging use in community practice.

Authors:  Karen J Wernli; Wendy B DeMartini; Laura Ichikawa; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega; Karla Kerlikowske; Louise M Henderson; Berta M Geller; Mike Hofmann; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Increasing referral of at-risk women for genetic counseling and BRCA testing using a screening tool in a community breast imaging center.

Authors:  Banu K Arun; Susan K Peterson; Lilian E Sweeney; Rachel D Bluebond; Rebecca S S Tidwell; Sukh Makhnoon; Anne C Kushwaha
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Suboptimal Use of Effective Contraceptive Methods in Young Mexican Women With Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Andrea Castro-Sanchez; Bertha Alejandra Martinez-Cannon; Alejandra Platas; Alejandro Mohar; Alan Fonseca; Yoatzin Vega; Adrian Fimbres-Morales; Cynthia Villarreal-Garza
Journal:  J Glob Oncol       Date:  2018-10
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.