Literature DB >> 23290667

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening.

Martha B Mainiero1, Ana Lourenco, Mary C Mahoney, Mary S Newell, Lisa Bailey, Lora D Barke, Carl D'Orsi, Jennifer A Harvey, Mary K Hayes, Phan Tuong Huynh, Peter M Jokich, Su-Ju Lee, Constance D Lehman, David A Mankoff, Joshua A Nepute, Samir B Patel, Handel E Reynolds, M Linda Sutherland, Bruce G Haffty.   

Abstract

Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment.
Copyright © 2013 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23290667     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2012.09.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  40 in total

1.  Toward 7T breast MRI clinical study: safety assessment using simulation of heterogeneous breast models in RF exposure.

Authors:  Xin Li; Joseph V Rispoli
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 4.668

2.  Breast Cancer Incidence by Stage Before and After Change in Screening Guidelines.

Authors:  Fangjian Guo; Yong-Fang Kuo; Abbey B Berenson
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2019-01       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 3.  Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts.

Authors:  John R Scheel; Janie M Lee; Brian L Sprague; Christoph I Lee; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-06-21       Impact factor: 8.661

4.  3D Supine Automated Ultrasound (SAUS, ABUS, ABVS) for Supplemental Screening Women with Dense Breasts.

Authors:  Alexander Mundinger
Journal:  J Breast Health       Date:  2016-04-01

5.  The Complexity of Achieving the Promise of Precision Breast Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Jennifer S Haas
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2017-01-27       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Diagnosis of sub-centimetre breast lesions: combining BI-RADS-US with strain elastography and contrast-enhanced ultrasound-a preliminary study in China.

Authors:  Xiaoyun Xiao; Qiongchao Jiang; Huan Wu; Xiaofeng Guan; Wei Qin; Baoming Luo
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 7.  Breast cancer screening in the era of density notification legislation: summary of 2014 Massachusetts experience and suggestion of an evidence-based management algorithm by multi-disciplinary expert panel.

Authors:  Phoebe E Freer; Priscilla J Slanetz; Jennifer S Haas; Nadine M Tung; Kevin S Hughes; Katrina Armstrong; A Alan Semine; Susan L Troyan; Robyn L Birdwell
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 4.872

8.  Breast Cancer Screening and Social Media: a Content Analysis of Evidence Use and Guideline Opinions on Twitter.

Authors:  Anthony Nastasi; Tyler Bryant; Joseph K Canner; Mark Dredze; Melissa S Camp; Neeraja Nagarajan
Journal:  J Cancer Educ       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.037

9.  Characterizing and eliminating errors in enhancement and subtraction artifacts in dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI: Chemical shift artifact of the third kind.

Authors:  Jamal J Derakhshan; Elizabeth S McDonald; Evan S Siegelman; Mitchell D Schnall; Felix W Wehrli
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 4.668

Review 10.  The Changing Landscape of Genetic Testing for Inherited Breast Cancer Predisposition.

Authors:  Anosheh Afghahi; Allison W Kurian
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2017-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.