Literature DB >> 26501536

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society.

Kevin C Oeffinger1, Elizabeth T H Fontham2, Ruth Etzioni3, Abbe Herzig4, James S Michaelson5, Ya-Chen Tina Shih6, Louise C Walter7, Timothy R Church8, Christopher R Flowers9, Samuel J LaMonte10, Andrew M D Wolf11, Carol DeSantis12, Joannie Lortet-Tieulent12, Kimberly Andrews12, Deana Manassaram-Baptiste12, Debbie Saslow12, Robert A Smith12, Otis W Brawley12, Richard Wender12.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality.
OBJECTIVE: To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer. PROCESS: The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk. RECOMMENDATIONS: The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26501536      PMCID: PMC4831582          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.12783

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


  108 in total

Review 1.  Initiation of population-based mammography screening in Dutch municipalities and effect on breast-cancer mortality: a systematic review.

Authors:  Suzie J Otto; Jacques Fracheboud; Caspar W N Looman; Mireille J M Broeders; Rob Boer; Jan H C L Hendriks; André L M Verbeek; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2003-04-26       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003.

Authors:  Robert A Smith; Debbie Saslow; Kimberly Andrews Sawyer; Wylie Burke; Mary E Costanza; W Phil Evans; Roger S Foster; Edward Hendrick; Harmon J Eyre; Steven Sener
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2003 May-Jun       Impact factor: 508.702

3.  US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey.

Authors:  L M Schwartz; S Woloshin; H C Sox; B Fischhoff; H G Welch
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-06-17

4.  Screening mammography for frail older women: what are the burdens?

Authors:  L C Walter; C Eng; K E Covinsky
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.128

5.  Cognition after major surgery in the elderly: test performance and complaints.

Authors:  J B Dijkstra; P J Houx; J Jolles
Journal:  Br J Anaesth       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 9.166

6.  The pattern of breast cancer screening utilization and its consequences.

Authors:  James Michaelson; Sameer Satija; Richard Moore; Griffin Weber; Elkan Halpern; Andrew Garland; Dhruv Puri; Daniel B Kopans
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-01-01       Impact factor: 6.860

7.  Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making.

Authors:  L C Walter; K E Covinsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-06       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Factors associated with accurate cancer detection during a clinical breast examination.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2000-10-01       Impact factor: 3.797

9.  Contribution of clinical breast examination to mammography screening in the early detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  C Bancej; K Decker; A Chiarelli; M Harrison; D Turner; J Brisson
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.136

10.  Gauging the impact of breast carcinoma screening in terms of tumor size and death rate.

Authors:  James S Michaelson; Sameer Satija; Daniel Kopans; Richard Moore; Melvin Silverstein; Arthur Comegno; Kevin Hughes; Alphonse Taghian; Simon Powell; Barbara Smith
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2003-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

View more
  421 in total

Review 1.  Key Elements of Mammography Shared Decision-Making: a Scoping Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Lori L DuBenske; Sarina B Schrager; Mary E Hitchcock; Amanda K Kane; Terry A Little; Helene E McDowell; Elizabeth S Burnside
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Knowledge Assessment and Screening Barriers for Breast Cancer in an Arab American Community in Dearborn, Michigan.

Authors:  Mariam Ayyash; Marwa Ayyash; Sheena Bahroloomi; Hiam Hamade; Mona Makki; Samar Hassouneh; R Alexander Blackwood
Journal:  J Community Health       Date:  2019-10

3.  Breast cancer screening initiation after turning 40 years of age within the PROSPR consortium.

Authors:  Elisabeth F Beaber; Anna N A Tosteson; Jennifer S Haas; Tracy Onega; Brian L Sprague; Donald L Weaver; Anne Marie McCarthy; Chyke A Doubeni; Virginia P Quinn; Celette Sugg Skinner; Ann G Zauber; William E Barlow
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-09-24       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Breast Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Call for Development and Validation of Patient-Oriented Shared Decision-Making Tools.

Authors:  Sarina Schrager; Elizabeth Burnside
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Comparing CISNET Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality Predictions to Observed Clinical Trial Results of Mammography Screening from Ages 40 to 49.

Authors:  Jeroen J van den Broek; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Hui Huang; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Elizabeth S Burnside; Cong Xu; Yisheng Li; Oguzhan Alagoz; Sandra J Lee; Natasha K Stout; Juhee Song; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Sylvia K Plevritis; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Suspicious breast calcifications undergoing stereotactic biopsy in women ages 70 and over: Breast cancer incidence by BI-RADS descriptors.

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

7.  Assistive lesion-emphasis system: an assistive system for fundus image readers.

Authors:  Samrudhdhi B Rangrej; Jayanthi Sivaswamy
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2017-05-24

8.  Characteristics and diagnosis of pregnancy and lactation associated breast cancer: Analysis of a self-reported regional registry.

Authors:  Amanda M Pugh; Courtney M Giannini; Susan M Pinney; Dennis J Hanseman; Elizabeth A Shaughnessy; Jaime D Lewis
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 2.565

9.  Sorafenib in breast cancer treatment: A systematic review and overview of clinical trials.

Authors:  Menelaos Zafrakas; Panayiota Papasozomenou; Christos Emmanouilides
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-08-10

10.  Multilevel Predictors of Continued Adherence to Breast Cancer Screening Among Women Ages 50-74 Years in a Screening Population.

Authors:  Elisabeth F Beaber; Brian L Sprague; Anna N A Tosteson; Jennifer S Haas; Tracy Onega; Marilyn M Schapira; Anne Marie McCarthy; Christopher I Li; Sally D Herschorn; Constance D Lehman; Karen J Wernli; William E Barlow
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-11-27       Impact factor: 2.681

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.