Literature DB >> 28644335

Practice Bulletin Number 179: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women.

.   

Abstract

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in American women (1). Regular screening mammography starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality in average-risk women (2). Screening, however, also exposes women to harm through false-positive test results and overdiagnosis of biologically indolent lesions. Differences in balancing benefits and harms have led to differences among major guidelines about what age to start, what age to stop, and how frequently to recommend mammography screening in average-risk women (2-4).Breast cancer risk assessment is very important for identifying women who may benefit from more intensive breast cancer surveillance; however, there is no standardized approach to office-based breast cancer risk assessment in the United States. This can lead to missed opportunities to identify women at high risk of breast cancer and may result in applying average-risk screening recommendations to high-risk women. Risk assessment and identification of women at high risk allow for referral to health care providers with expertise in cancer genetics counseling and testing for breast cancer-related germline mutations (eg, BRCA), patient counseling about risk-reduction options, and cascade testing to identify family members who also may be at increased risk.The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to discuss breast cancer risk assessment, review breast cancer screening guidelines in average-risk women, and outline some of the controversies surrounding breast cancer screening. It will present recommendations for using a framework of shared decision making to assist women in balancing their personal values regarding benefits and harms of screening at various ages and intervals to make personal screening choices from within a range of reasonable options. Recommendations for women at elevated risk and discussion of new technologies, such as tomosynthesis, are beyond the scope of this document and are addressed in other publications of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (5-7).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28644335     DOI: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002158

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obstet Gynecol        ISSN: 0029-7844            Impact factor:   7.661


  35 in total

1.  Variation in Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations by Primary Care Providers Surveyed in Wisconsin.

Authors:  Emily Nachtigal; Noelle K LoConte; Sarah Kerch; Xiao Zhang; Amanda Parkes
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Xiaofei He; Karen E Schifferdecker; Elissa M Ozanne; Anna N A Tosteson; Steven Woloshin; Lisa M Schwartz
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Primary Care-Based Staff Ideas for Implementing a Mammography Decision Aid for Women 75+: a Qualitative Study.

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

Review 4.  Gamma Secretase Inhibitors in Cancer: A Current Perspective on Clinical Performance.

Authors:  Tyler R McCaw; Evelyn Inga; Herbert Chen; Renata Jaskula-Sztul; Vikas Dudeja; James A Bibb; Bin Ren; J Bart Rose
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2021-01-02

5.  Commentary ACOG Practice Bulletin July 2017: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women.

Authors:  Victoria Mango; Yolanda Bryce; Elizabeth Anne Morris; Elisabetta Gianotti; Katja Pinker
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-24       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Scripts and Strategies for Discussing Stopping Cancer Screening with Adults > 75 Years: a Qualitative Study.

Authors:  Mara A Schonberg; Alicia R Jacobson; Maria Karamourtopoulos; Gianna M Aliberti; Adlin Pinheiro; Alexander K Smith; Linnaea C Schuttner; Elyse R Park; Mary Beth Hamel
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 7.  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

8.  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

9.  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

10.  A Primary Care Provider's Guide to Clinical Needs of Women With Spinal Cord Injury.

Authors:  Chloe Slocum; Molly Halloran; Cody Unser
Journal:  Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil       Date:  2020
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.