Louise C Walter1, Mara A Schonberg2. 1. University of California, San Francisco2San Francisco VA Medical Center, San Francisco, California. 2. Division of General Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Guidelines recommend individualizing screening mammography decisions for women aged 75 years and older. However, little pragmatic guidance is available to help counsel patients. OBJECTIVE: To provide an evidence-based approach for individualizing decision-making about screening mammography in older women. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed for English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals published from January 1, 1990, to February 1, 2014, to identify risk factors for late-life breast cancer in women aged 65 years and older and to quantify the benefits and harms of screening mammography for women aged 75 years and older. FINDINGS: Age is the major risk factor for developing and dying from breast cancer. Breast cancer risk factors that reflect hormonal exposures in the distant past, such as age at first birth or age at menarche, are less predictive of late-life breast cancer than factors indicating recent hormonal exposures such as high bone mass or obesity. Randomized trials of the benefits of screening mammography did not include women older than 74 years. Thus it is not known if screening mammography benefits older women. Observational studies favor extending screening mammography to older women who have a life expectancy of more than 10 years. Modeling studies estimate 2 fewer breast cancer deaths/1000 women who in their 70s continue biennial screening for 10 years instead of stopping screening at age 69. Potential harms of continued screening over 10 years include false-positive mammograms in approximately 200/1000 women screened and overdiagnosis (ie, finding breast cancer that would not have clinically surfaced otherwise) in approximately 13/1000 women screened. Providing information about life expectancy along with potential benefits and harms of screening may help older women's decision-making about screening mammography. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For women with less than a 10-year life expectancy, recommendations to stop screening mammography should emphasize increased potential harms from screening and highlight health promotion measures likely to be beneficial over the short term. For women with a life expectancy of more than 10 years, deciding whether potential benefits of screening outweigh harms becomes a value judgment for patients, requiring a realistic understanding of screening outcomes.
IMPORTANCE: Guidelines recommend individualizing screening mammography decisions for women aged 75 years and older. However, little pragmatic guidance is available to help counsel patients. OBJECTIVE: To provide an evidence-based approach for individualizing decision-making about screening mammography in older women. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched PubMed for English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals published from January 1, 1990, to February 1, 2014, to identify risk factors for late-life breast cancer in women aged 65 years and older and to quantify the benefits and harms of screening mammography for women aged 75 years and older. FINDINGS: Age is the major risk factor for developing and dying from breast cancer. Breast cancer risk factors that reflect hormonal exposures in the distant past, such as age at first birth or age at menarche, are less predictive of late-life breast cancer than factors indicating recent hormonal exposures such as high bone mass or obesity. Randomized trials of the benefits of screening mammography did not include women older than 74 years. Thus it is not known if screening mammography benefits older women. Observational studies favor extending screening mammography to older women who have a life expectancy of more than 10 years. Modeling studies estimate 2 fewer breast cancer deaths/1000 women who in their 70s continue biennial screening for 10 years instead of stopping screening at age 69. Potential harms of continued screening over 10 years include false-positive mammograms in approximately 200/1000 women screened and overdiagnosis (ie, finding breast cancer that would not have clinically surfaced otherwise) in approximately 13/1000 women screened. Providing information about life expectancy along with potential benefits and harms of screening may help older women's decision-making about screening mammography. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: For women with less than a 10-year life expectancy, recommendations to stop screening mammography should emphasize increased potential harms from screening and highlight health promotion measures likely to be beneficial over the short term. For women with a life expectancy of more than 10 years, deciding whether potential benefits of screening outweigh harms becomes a value judgment for patients, requiring a realistic understanding of screening outcomes.
Authors: Virginia L Ernster; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; William E Barlow; Yingye Zheng; Donald L Weaver; Gary Cutter; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Robert Rosenberg; Patricia A Carney; Karla Kerlikowske; Stephen H Taplin; Nicole Urban; Berta M Geller Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2002-10-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Carol Sweeney; Cindy K Blair; Kristin E Anderson; DeAnn Lazovich; Aaron R Folsom Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-11-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: E P McCarthy; R B Burns; K M Freund; A S Ash; M Shwartz; S L Marwill; M A Moskowitz Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Patricia A Carney; Diana L Miglioretti; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Karla Kerlikowske; Robert Rosenberg; Carolyn M Rutter; Berta M Geller; Linn A Abraham; Steven H Taplin; Mark Dignan; Gary Cutter; Rachel Ballard-Barbash Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2003-02-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Nancy L Schoenborn; Jin Huang; Orla C Sheehan; Jennifer L Wolff; David L Roth; Cynthia M Boyd Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Cindy S Lee; Debapriya Sengupta; Mythreyi Bhargavan-Chatfield; Edward A Sickles; Elizabeth S Burnside; Margarita L Zuley Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Mara A Schonberg; Alicia R Jacobson; Gianna M Aliberti; Michelle Hayes; Anne Hackman; Maria Karamourtopolous; Christine Kistler Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-09-04 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Lars J Grimm; David Y Johnson; Karen S Johnson; Jay A Baker; Mary Scott Soo; E Shelley Hwang; Sujata V Ghate Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Jessica L Krok-Schoen; James L Fisher; Ryan D Baltic; Electra D Paskett Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Diana S Hoover; Monique R Pappadis; Ashley J Housten; Shilpa Krishnan; Susan C Weller; Sharon H Giordano; Therese B Bevers; James S Goodwin; Robert J Volk Journal: Health Commun Date: 2018-01-26