BACKGROUND: Current data on the pathologic diagnoses of breast biopsy after mammography can inform patients, clinicians, and researchers about important population trends. METHODS: Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data on 4,020,140 mammograms between 1996 and 2008 were linked to 76,567 pathology specimens. Trends in diagnoses in biopsies by time and risk factors (patient age, breast density, and family history of breast cancer) were examined for screening and diagnostic mammography (performed for a breast symptom or short-interval follow-up). RESULTS: Of the total mammograms, 88.5% were screening and 11.5% diagnostic; 1.2% of screening and 6.8% of diagnostic mammograms were followed by biopsies. The frequency of biopsies over time was stable after screening mammograms, but increased after diagnostic mammograms. For biopsies obtained after screening, frequencies of invasive carcinoma increased over time for women ages 40-49 and 60-69, Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) increased for those ages 40-69, whereas benign diagnoses decreased for all ages. No trends in pathology diagnoses were found following diagnostic mammograms. Dense breast tissue was associated with high-risk lesions and DCIS relative to nondense breast tissue. Family history of breast cancer was associated with DCIS and invasive cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Although the frequency of breast biopsy after screening mammography has not changed over time, the percentages of biopsies with DCIS and invasive cancer diagnoses have increased. Among biopsies following mammography, women with dense breasts or family history of breast cancer were more likely to have high-risk lesions or invasive cancer. These findings are relevant to breast cancer screening and diagnostic practices.
BACKGROUND: Current data on the pathologic diagnoses of breast biopsy after mammography can inform patients, clinicians, and researchers about important population trends. METHODS:Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data on 4,020,140 mammograms between 1996 and 2008 were linked to 76,567 pathology specimens. Trends in diagnoses in biopsies by time and risk factors (patient age, breast density, and family history of breast cancer) were examined for screening and diagnostic mammography (performed for a breast symptom or short-interval follow-up). RESULTS: Of the total mammograms, 88.5% were screening and 11.5% diagnostic; 1.2% of screening and 6.8% of diagnostic mammograms were followed by biopsies. The frequency of biopsies over time was stable after screening mammograms, but increased after diagnostic mammograms. For biopsies obtained after screening, frequencies of invasive carcinoma increased over time for women ages 40-49 and 60-69, Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) increased for those ages 40-69, whereas benign diagnoses decreased for all ages. No trends in pathology diagnoses were found following diagnostic mammograms. Dense breast tissue was associated with high-risk lesions and DCIS relative to nondense breast tissue. Family history of breast cancer was associated with DCIS and invasive cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Although the frequency of breast biopsy after screening mammography has not changed over time, the percentages of biopsies with DCIS and invasive cancer diagnoses have increased. Among biopsies following mammography, women with dense breasts or family history of breast cancer were more likely to have high-risk lesions or invasive cancer. These findings are relevant to breast cancer screening and diagnostic practices.
Authors: Karla Kerlikowske; Andrea J Cook; Diana S M Buist; Steve R Cummings; Celine Vachon; Pamela Vacek; Diana L Miglioretti Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-07-19 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Rebecca A Hubbard; Karla Kerlikowske; Chris I Flowers; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Weiwei Zhu; Diana L Miglioretti Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2011-10-18 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Donald L Weaver; Robert D Rosenberg; William E Barlow; Laura Ichikawa; Patricia A Carney; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Berta M Geller; Charles R Key; Susan J Maygarden; Rachel Ballard-Barbash Journal: Cancer Date: 2006-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Yu Shen; Ying Yang; Lurdes Y T Inoue; Mark F Munsell; Anthony B Miller; Donald A Berry Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-08-17 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Peter R Eby; Jennifer E Ochsner; Wendy B DeMartini; Kimberly H Allison; Sue Peacock; Constance D Lehman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Tiina Lehtimäki; Mikael Lundin; Nina Linder; Harri Sihto; Kaija Holli; Taina Turpeenniemi-Hujanen; Vesa Kataja; Jorma Isola; Heikki Joensuu; Johan Lundin Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2011-12-28 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Tina J Hieken; Jodi M Carter; John R Hawse; Tanya L Hoskin; Melanie Bois; Marlene Frost; Lynn C Hartmann; Derek C Radisky; Daniel W Visscher; Amy C Degnim Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2015-08-14
Authors: Jonine D Figueroa; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Louise A Brinton; Maya M Palakal; Amy C Degnim; Derek Radisky; Lynn C Hartmann; Marlene H Frost; Melody L Stallings Mann; Daphne Papathomas; Gretchen L Gierach; Stephen M Hewitt; Maire A Duggan; Daniel Visscher; Mark E Sherman Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-08-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Xiaoxian Li; Zhongliang Ma; Toncred M Styblo; Cletus A Arciero; Haibo Wang; Michael A Cohen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-10-17 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: E Shelley Hwang; Terry Hyslop; Laura H Hendrix; Stephanie Duong; Isabelle Bedrosian; Elissa Price; Abigail Caudle; Tina Hieken; Joseph Guenther; Clifford A Hudis; Eric Winer; Alan P Lyss; Diana Dickson-Witmer; Richard Hoefer; David W Ollila; Timothy Hardman; Jeffrey Marks; Yunn-Yi Chen; Gregor Krings; Laura Esserman; Nola Hylton Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2020-03-03 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Caroline S Dorfman; Eneka Lamb; Alyssa Van Denburg; Anava A Wren; Mary Scott Soo; Kaylee Faircloth; Vicky Gandhi; Rebecca A Shelby Journal: J Psychosoc Oncol Date: 2018-01-11
Authors: Lusine Yaghjyan; Robert Arao; Cole Brokamp; Ellen S O'Meara; Brian L Sprague; Gabriela Ghita; Patrick Ryan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2017-04-06 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Jonine D Figueroa; Gretchen L Gierach; Máire A Duggan; Shaoqi Fan; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Yihong Wang; Roni T Falk; Olivier Loudig; Mustapha Abubakar; Mindy Ginsberg; Teresa M Kimes; Kathryn Richert-Boe; Andrew G Glass; Thomas E Rohan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2021-03-18 Impact factor: 6.466