Literature DB >> 24691608

A systematic assessment of benefits and risks to guide breast cancer screening decisions.

Lydia E Pace1, Nancy L Keating2.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among US women. Mammography screening may be associated with reduced breast cancer mortality but can also cause harm. Guidelines recommend individualizing screening decisions, particularly for younger women.
OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the evidence on the mortality benefit and chief harms of mammography screening and what is known about how to individualize mammography screening decisions, including communicating risks and benefits to patients. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched MEDLINE from 1960-2014 to describe (1) benefits of mammography, (2) harms of mammography, and (3) individualizing screening decisions and promoting informed decision making. We also manually searched reference lists of key articles retrieved, selected reviews, meta-analyses, and practice recommendations. We rated the level of evidence using the American Heart Association guidelines.
RESULTS: Mammography screening is associated with a 19% overall reduction of breast cancer mortality (approximately 15% for women in their 40s and 32% for women in their 60s). For a 40- or 50-year-old woman undergoing 10 years of annual mammograms, the cumulative risk of a false-positive result is about 61%. About 19% of the cancers diagnosed during that 10-year period would not have become clinically apparent without screening (overdiagnosis), although there is uncertainty about this estimate. The net benefit of screening depends greatly on baseline breast cancer risk, which should be incorporated into screening decisions. Decision aids have the potential to help patients integrate information about risks and benefits with their own values and priorities, although they are not yet widely available for use in clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: To maximize the benefit of mammography screening, decisions should be individualized based on patients' risk profiles and preferences. Risk models and decision aids are useful tools, but more research is needed to optimize these and to further quantify overdiagnosis. Research should also explore other breast cancer screening strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24691608     DOI: 10.1001/jama.2014.1398

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  122 in total

1.  Listening to Women: Expectations and Experiences in Breast Imaging.

Authors:  Susan Harvey; Aimee M Gallagher; Martha Nolan; Christine M Hughes
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.681

2.  Breast density across a regional screening population: effects of age, ethnicity and deprivation.

Authors:  Samantha L Heller; Sue Hudson; Louise S Wilkinson
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-09-02       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Candidate early detection protein biomarkers for ER+/PR+ invasive ductal breast carcinoma identified using pre-clinical plasma from the WHI observational study.

Authors:  Matthew F Buas; Jung-hyun Rho; Xiaoyu Chai; Yuzheng Zhang; Paul D Lampe; Christopher I Li
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-08-30       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Screening Mammography Among Older Women: A Review of United States Guidelines and Potential Harms.

Authors:  Deborah S Mack; Kate L Lapane
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2019-01-09       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Results of the national lung cancer screening trial: where are we now?

Authors:  Neel P Chudgar; Peter R Bucciarelli; Elizabeth M Jeffries; Nabil P Rizk; Bernard J Park; Prasad S Adusumilli; David R Jones
Journal:  Thorac Surg Clin       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 1.750

6.  Psychological impact of breast cancer screening in Japan.

Authors:  Atsuko Kitano; Hideko Yamauchi; Takashi Hosaka; Hiroshi Yagata; Keiko Hosokawa; Sachiko Ohde; Seigo Nakamura; Masafumi Takimoto; Hiroko Tsunoda
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 3.402

Review 7.  Cancer Screening in the Elderly: A Review of Breast, Colorectal, Lung, and Prostate Cancer Screening.

Authors:  Ashwin A Kotwal; Mara A Schonberg
Journal:  Cancer J       Date:  2017 Jul/Aug       Impact factor: 3.360

Review 8.  Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update.

Authors:  Mackenzie S Fuller; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 9.  Imaging-based screening: maximizing benefits and minimizing harms.

Authors:  Jessica C Germino; Joann G Elmore; Ruth C Carlos; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2015-06-12       Impact factor: 1.605

10.  Women's Awareness and Perceived Importance of the Harms and Benefits of Mammography Screening: Results From a 2016 National Survey.

Authors:  Jiani Yu; Rebekah H Nagler; Erika Franklin Fowler; Karla Kerlikowske; Sarah E Gollust
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 21.873

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.