Literature DB >> 31538501

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

Almir Gv Bitencourt1,2, Carolina Rossi Saccarelli1,3, Christiane Kuhl4, Elizabeth A Morris1.   

Abstract

Breast cancer screening is widely recognized for reducing breast cancer mortality. The objective in screening is to diagnose asymptomatic early stage disease, thereby improving treatment efficacy. Screening recommendations have been widely debated over the past years and controversies remain regarding the optimal screening frequency, age to start screening, and age to end screening. While there are no new trials, follow-up information of randomized controlled trials has become available. The American College of Physicians recently issued a new guidance statement on screening for breast cancer in average-risk women, with similar recommendations to the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and to European guidelines. However, these guidelines differ from those ofother American specialty societies. The variations reflect differences in the organizations' values, the metrics used to evaluate screening results, and the differences in healthcare organization (individualized or state-organized healthcare). False-positive rates and overdiagnosis of biologically insignificant cancer are perceived as the most important potential harms associated with mammographic screening; however, there is limited evidence on their actual consequences. Most specialty societies agree that physicians should offer mammographic screening at age 40 years for average-risk women and discuss its benefits and potential harms to achieve a personalized screening strategy through a shared decision-making process.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31538501      PMCID: PMC6849689          DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20190660

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  19 in total

1.  Underdiagnosis is the main challenge in breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Christiane K Kuhl
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 2.  Harmonizing Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations: Metrics and Accountability.

Authors:  Cindy S Lee; Linda Moy; Sarah M Friedewald; Edward A Sickles; Debra L Monticciolo
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2017-10-18       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Screening for Breast Cancer in Average-Risk Women: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians.

Authors:  Amir Qaseem; Jennifer S Lin; Reem A Mustafa; Carrie A Horwitch; Timothy J Wilt; Mary Ann Forciea; Nick Fitterman; Alfonso Iorio; Devan Kansagara; Michael Maroto; Robert M McLean; Janice E Tufte; Sandeep Vijan
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2019-04-09       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening: Implications of Breast Density.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Linda E Chen; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 5.  Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Models and High-Risk Screening.

Authors:  Lora D Barke; Mary E Freivogel
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  A Deep Learning Mammography-based Model for Improved Breast Cancer Risk Prediction.

Authors:  Adam Yala; Constance Lehman; Tal Schuster; Tally Portnoi; Regina Barzilay
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2019-05-07       Impact factor: 11.105

7.  Breast Cancer Screening in Women at Higher-Than-Average Risk: Recommendations From the ACR.

Authors:  Debra L Monticciolo; Mary S Newell; Linda Moy; Bethany Niell; Barbara Monsees; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2018-01-19       Impact factor: 5.532

8.  Position paper on screening for breast cancer by the European Society of Breast Imaging (EUSOBI) and 30 national breast radiology bodies from Austria, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Israel, Lithuania, Moldova, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey.

Authors:  Francesco Sardanelli; Hildegunn S Aase; Marina Álvarez; Edward Azavedo; Henk J Baarslag; Corinne Balleyguier; Pascal A Baltzer; Vanesa Beslagic; Ulrich Bick; Dragana Bogdanovic-Stojanovic; Ruta Briediene; Boris Brkljacic; Julia Camps Herrero; Catherine Colin; Eleanor Cornford; Jan Danes; Gérard de Geer; Gul Esen; Andrew Evans; Michael H Fuchsjaeger; Fiona J Gilbert; Oswald Graf; Gormlaith Hargaden; Thomas H Helbich; Sylvia H Heywang-Köbrunner; Valentin Ivanov; Ásbjörn Jónsson; Christiane K Kuhl; Eugenia C Lisencu; Elzbieta Luczynska; Ritse M Mann; Jose C Marques; Laura Martincich; Margarete Mortier; Markus Müller-Schimpfle; Katalin Ormandi; Pietro Panizza; Federica Pediconi; Ruud M Pijnappel; Katja Pinker; Tarja Rissanen; Natalia Rotaru; Gianni Saguatti; Tamar Sella; Jana Slobodníková; Maret Talk; Patrice Taourel; Rubina M Trimboli; Ilse Vejborg; Athina Vourtsis; Gabor Forrai
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Systematic review on women's values and preferences concerning breast cancer screening and diagnostic services.

Authors:  Alexander G Mathioudakis; Minna Salakari; Liisa Pylkkanen; Zuleika Saz-Parkinson; Anke Bramesfeld; Silvia Deandrea; Donata Lerda; Luciana Neamtiu; Hector Pardo-Hernandez; Ivan Solà; Pablo Alonso-Coello
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2019-03-24       Impact factor: 3.894

Review 10.  Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening.

Authors:  Ritse M Mann; Christiane K Kuhl; Linda Moy
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 4.813

View more
  7 in total

1.  Genetic Counseling, Screening and Risk-Reducing Surgery in Patients with Primary Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA Mutations: Unmet Needs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Authors:  Hiba A Moukadem; Ahmad Al Masry; Rula W Atwani; Firas Kreidieh; Lana E Khalil; Rita Saroufim; Sarah Daouk; Iman Abou Dalle; Nagi S El Saghir
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2021-12-30

2.  Trends in cancer incidence and mortality rates in the United States from 1975 to 2016.

Authors:  Rong Yang; Yuwei Zhou; Yanli Wang; Chengli Du; Yihe Wu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-12

3.  Views of health professionals on risk-based breast cancer screening and its implementation in the Spanish National Health System: A qualitative discussion group study.

Authors:  Celmira Laza-Vásquez; Núria Codern-Bové; Àngels Cardona-Cardona; Maria José Hernández-Leal; Maria José Pérez-Lacasta; Misericòrdia Carles-Lavila; Montserrat Rué
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  The current status of risk-stratified breast screening.

Authors:  Ash Kieran Clift; David Dodwell; Simon Lord; Stavros Petrou; Sir Michael Brady; Gary S Collins; Julia Hippisley-Cox
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2021-10-26       Impact factor: 9.075

5.  Mammographic Variation Measures, Breast Density, and Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  John Heine; Erin Fowler; Christopher G Scott; Matthew R Jensen; John Shepherd; Carrie B Hruska; Stacey J Winham; Kathleen R Brandt; Fang F Wu; Aaron D Norman; Vernon S Pankratz; Diana L Miglioretti; Karla Kerlikowske; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 6.582

6.  Self-reported symptoms among participants in a population-based screening program.

Authors:  Marthe Larsen; Marie Lilleborge; Einar Vigeland; Solveig Hofvind
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2020-08-31       Impact factor: 4.380

7.  The Effect of Automated Mammogram Orders Paired With Electronic Invitations to Self-schedule on Mammogram Scheduling Outcomes: Observational Cohort Comparison.

Authors:  Frederick North; Elissa M Nelson; Rebecca J Buss; Rebecca J Majerus; Matthew C Thompson; Brian A Crum
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2021-12-07
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.