Literature DB >> 28577623

Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening: Implications of Breast Density.

Christoph I Lee1, Linda E Chen2, Joann G Elmore3.   

Abstract

The approach to breast cancer screening has changed over time from a general approach to a more personalized, risk-based approach. Women with dense breasts, one of the most prevalent risk factors, are now being informed that they are at increased risk of developing breast cancer and should consider supplemental screening beyond mammography. This article reviews the current evidence regarding the impact of breast density relative to other known risk factors, the evidence regarding supplemental screening for women with dense breasts, supplemental screening options, and recommendations for physicians having shared decision-making discussions with women who have dense breasts.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast density; Mammography; Risk-based screening; Supplemental screening

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28577623      PMCID: PMC5458625          DOI: 10.1016/j.mcna.2017.03.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Clin North Am        ISSN: 0025-7125            Impact factor:   5.456


  59 in total

1.  A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto; Daniela Bernardi; Massimo Calabrese; Manuela Durando; Maria Adalgisa Gentilini; Giovanna Mariscotti; Francesco Monetti; Enrica Moriconi; Barbara Pesce; Antonella Roselli; Carmen Stevanin; Margherita Tapparelli; Nehmat Houssami
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2012-01-27       Impact factor: 4.380

2.  Collaborative Modeling of the Benefits and Harms Associated With Different U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Strategies.

Authors:  Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Natasha K Stout; Clyde B Schechter; Jeroen J van den Broek; Diana L Miglioretti; Martin Krapcho; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Diego Munoz; Sandra J Lee; Donald A Berry; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Oguzhan Alagoz; Karla Kerlikowske; Anna N A Tosteson; Aimee M Near; Amanda Hoeffken; Yaojen Chang; Eveline A Heijnsdijk; Gary Chisholm; Xuelin Huang; Hui Huang; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Ronald Gangnon; Brian L Sprague; Sylvia Plevritis; Eric Feuer; Harry J de Koning; Kathleen A Cronin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Rebecca A Hubbard; Diana L Miglioretti; Berta M Geller; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Constance D Lehman; Stephen H Taplin; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-10-18       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Breast tomosynthesis: state-of-the-art and review of the literature.

Authors:  Jay A Baker; Joseph Y Lo
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.173

5.  Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  John T Schousboe; Karla Kerlikowske; Andrew Loh; Steven R Cummings
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2011-07-05       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  Comparative effectiveness of combined digital mammography and tomosynthesis screening for women with dense breasts.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Mucahit Cevik; Oguzhan Alagoz; Brian L Sprague; Anna N A Tosteson; Diana L Miglioretti; Karla Kerlikowske; Natasha K Stout; Jeffrey G Jarvik; Scott D Ramsey; Constance D Lehman
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Association of diet and mammographic breast density in the Minnesota breast cancer family cohort.

Authors:  C M Vachon; L H Kushi; J R Cerhan; C C Kuni; T A Sellers
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Mammographic density and physical assessment of the breast.

Authors:  C A Swann; D B Kopans; K A McCarthy; G White; D A Hall
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Breast cancer detection: radiologists' performance using mammography with and without automated whole-breast ultrasound.

Authors:  Kevin M Kelly; Judy Dean; Sung-Jae Lee; W Scott Comulada
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2010-07-15       Impact factor: 5.315

View more
  23 in total

1.  Breast cancer screening in average-risk women: towards personalized screening.

Authors:  Almir Gv Bitencourt; Carolina Rossi Saccarelli; Christiane Kuhl; Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Finite element modelling and validation for breast cancer detection using digital image elasto-tomography.

Authors:  Hina M Ismail; Chris G Pretty; Matthew K Signal; Marcus Haggers; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2018-03-10       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  Body mass index, breast density, and the risk of breast cancer development in relation to the menopausal status; results from a population-based screening program in a native African-Arab country.

Authors:  Rasha M Kamal; Salma Mostafa; Dorria Salem; Ahmed M ElHatw; Sherif M Mokhtar; Rasha Wessam; Sherihan Fakhry
Journal:  Acta Radiol Open       Date:  2022-06-30

4.  Underutilization of Supplemental Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Among Patients at High Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Randy Miles; Fei Wan; Tracy L Onega; Amanda Lenderink-Carpenter; Ellen S O'Meara; Weiwei Zhu; Louise M Henderson; Jennifer S Haas; Deirdre A Hill; Anna N A Tosteson; Karen J Wernli; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Janie M Lee; Constance D Lehman; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 2.681

Review 5.  Assessing Risk of Breast Cancer: A Review of Risk Prediction Models.

Authors:  Geunwon Kim; Manisha Bahl
Journal:  J Breast Imaging       Date:  2021-02-19

6.  Factors Influencing Mammographic Density in Asian Women: A Retrospective Cohort Study in the Northeast Region of Peninsular Malaysia.

Authors:  Tengku Muhammad Hanis; Wan Nor Arifin; Juhara Haron; Wan Faiziah Wan Abdul Rahman; Nur Intan Raihana Ruhaiyem; Rosni Abdullah; Kamarul Imran Musa
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-30

Review 7.  A Concise Review on the Utilization of Abbreviated Protocol Breast MRI over Full Diagnostic Protocol in Breast Cancer Detection.

Authors:  Haytham Al Ewaidat; Mohammad Ayasrah
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2022-04-28

8.  Optimal Screening in Breast Cancer Survivors With Dense Breasts on Mammography.

Authors:  Habib Rahbar; Janie M Lee; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 50.717

9.  Availability Versus Utilization of Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Post Passage of Breast Density Legislation.

Authors:  Mary W Marsh; Thad S Benefield; Sheila Lee; Michael Pritchard; Katie Earnhardt; Robert Agans; Louise M Henderson
Journal:  J Womens Health (Larchmt)       Date:  2020-09-22       Impact factor: 2.681

10.  Comprehensive Breast Cancer Risk Assessment for CHEK2 and ATM Pathogenic Variant Carriers Incorporating a Polygenic Risk Score and the Tyrer-Cuzick Model.

Authors:  Shannon Gallagher; Elisha Hughes; Allison W Kurian; Susan M Domchek; Judy Garber; Braden Probst; Brian Morris; Placede Tshiaba; Stephanie Meek; Eric Rosenthal; Benjamin Roa; Thomas P Slavin; Susanne Wagner; Jeffrey Weitzel; Alexander Gutin; Jerry S Lanchbury; Mark Robson
Journal:  JCO Precis Oncol       Date:  2021-06-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.