Literature DB >> 24023072

The California breast density information group: a collaborative response to the issues of breast density, breast cancer risk, and breast density notification legislation.

Elissa R Price1, Jonathan Hargreaves, Jafi A Lipson, Edward A Sickles, R James Brenner, Karen K Lindfors, Bonnie N Joe, Jessica W T Leung, Stephen A Feig, Lawrence W Bassett, Haydee Ojeda-Fournier, Bruce L Daniel, Allison W Kurian, Elyse Love, Lauren Ryan, Donna D Walgenbach, Debra M Ikeda.   

Abstract

In anticipation of breast density notification legislation in the state of California, which would require notification of women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breast tissue, a working group of breast imagers and breast cancer risk specialists was formed to provide a common response framework. The California Breast Density Information Group identified key elements and implications of the law, researching scientific evidence needed to develop a robust response. In particular, issues of risk associated with dense breast tissue, masking of cancers by dense tissue on mammograms, and the efficacy, benefits, and harms of supplementary screening tests were studied and consensus reached. National guidelines and peer-reviewed published literature were used to recommend that women with dense breast tissue at screening mammography follow supplemental screening guidelines based on breast cancer risk assessment. The goal of developing educational materials for referring clinicians and patients was reached with the construction of an easily accessible Web site that contains information about breast density, breast cancer risk assessment, and supplementary imaging. This multi-institutional, multidisciplinary approach may be useful for organizations to frame responses as similar legislation is passed across the United States. Online supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2013.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24023072     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.13131217

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  30 in total

1.  Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.

Authors:  Said Pertuz; Elizabeth S McDonald; Susan P Weinstein; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Diagnostic workup and costs of a single supplemental molecular breast imaging screen of mammographically dense breasts.

Authors:  Carrie B Hruska; Amy Lynn Conners; Katie N Jones; Michael K O'Connor; James P Moriarty; Judy C Boughey; Deborah J Rhodes
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 3.  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

4.  The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Celine M Vachon; V Shane Pankratz; Christopher G Scott; Lothar Haeberle; Elad Ziv; Matthew R Jensen; Kathleen R Brandt; Dana H Whaley; Janet E Olson; Katharina Heusinger; Carolin C Hack; Sebastian M Jud; Matthias W Beckmann; Ruediger Schulz-Wendtland; Jeffrey A Tice; Aaron D Norman; Julie M Cunningham; Kristen S Purrington; Douglas F Easton; Thomas A Sellers; Karla Kerlikowske; Peter A Fasching; Fergus J Couch
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Acceptability of an Interactive Computer-Animated Agent to Promote Patient-Provider Communication About Breast Density: a Mixed Method Pilot Study.

Authors:  Christine Gunn; Ariel Maschke; Timothy Bickmore; Mark Kennedy; Margaret F Hopkins; Michael D C Fishman; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Erica T Warner
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-01-09       Impact factor: 5.128

6.  Very low mammographic breast density predicts poorer outcome in patients with invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Amro Masarwah; Päivi Auvinen; Mazen Sudah; Suvi Rautiainen; Anna Sutela; Outi Pelkonen; Sanna Oikari; Veli-Matti Kosma; Ritva Vanninen
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 5.315

7.  A Qualitative Study of Spanish-Speakers' Experience with Dense Breast Notifications in a Massachusetts Safety-Net Hospital.

Authors:  Christine M Gunn; Amy Fitzpatrick; Sarah Waugh; Michelle Carrera; Nancy R Kressin; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Tracy A Battaglia
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 5.128

8.  Relationship Between Breast Density and Selective Estrogen-Receptor Modulators, Aromatase Inhibitors, Physical Activity, and Diet: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ernest U Ekpo; Patrick C Brennan; Claudia Mello-Thoms; Mark F McEntee
Journal:  Integr Cancer Ther       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 3.279

9.  Screen-detected versus interval cancers: Effect of imaging modality and breast density in the Flemish Breast Cancer Screening Programme.

Authors:  Lore Timmermans; Luc Bleyen; Klaus Bacher; Koen Van Herck; Kim Lemmens; Chantal Van Ongeval; Andre Van Steen; Patrick Martens; Isabel De Brabander; Mathieu Goossens; Hubert Thierens
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-03-13       Impact factor: 5.315

10.  Phase aberration simulation study of MRgFUS breast treatments.

Authors:  Alexis I Farrer; Scott Almquist; Christopher R Dillon; Leigh A Neumayer; Dennis L Parker; Douglas A Christensen; Allison Payne
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.