Literature DB >> 3407158

Why isn't every woman over 40 in a breast cancer detection program?

C L Robertson.   

Abstract

Mortality from breast cancer may be reduced by more than 10,000 deaths per year in this country if the recommendations for screening all asymptomatic women older than 40 years for breast cancer, issued in 1982 by the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology, are followed. Compliance with those recommendations six years later is poor, even in well-to-do, medically served populations, primarily because of poor compliance by physicians. Radiation risk is an often-cited concern, although it has been shown to be an insignificant factor in breast cancer screening. High cost, also cited as a concern, is less of a problem-the charges for mammography having declined steeply in the past few years. At the current price levels, it makes financial and humanitarian sense to provide screening rather than terminal care for metastatic breast cancer. The third concern cited by physicians, that of diagnostic accuracy, must be addressed by a careful and accurate statistical description of the results of each screening program. Sensitivity of more than 80% with positive predictive values of about a third can be achieved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3407158      PMCID: PMC1026276     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  West J Med        ISSN: 0093-0415


  13 in total

Review 1.  Imaging in breast cancer.

Authors:  D D Paulus
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1987 May-Jun       Impact factor: 508.702

2.  Sensitivity and specificity of first screen mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a preliminary report from five centers.

Authors:  C J Baines; A B Miller; C Wall; D V McFarlane; I S Simor; R Jong; B J Shapiro; L Audet; M Petitclerc; D Ouimet-Oliva
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Reduction of breast cancer mortality through mass screening with modern mammography. First results of the Nijmegen project, 1975-1981.

Authors:  A L Verbeek; J H Hendriks; R Holland; M Mravunac; F Sturmans; N E Day
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1984-06-02       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Evaluation of screening for breast cancer in a non-randomised study (the DOM project) by means of a case-control study.

Authors:  H J Collette; N E Day; J J Rombach; F de Waard
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1984-06-02       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report.

Authors:  L H Baker
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 508.702

6.  Cancer statistics, 1985.

Authors:  E Silverberg
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1985 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Cost analysis of aggressive breast cancer screening.

Authors:  M Moskowitz; S H Fox
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Randomized mammographic screening for breast cancer in Stockholm. Design, first round results and comparisons.

Authors:  J Frisell; U Glas; L Hellström; A Somell
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Screening mammography: referral practices of Los Angeles physicians.

Authors:  L W Bassett; D H Bunnell; J A Cerny; R H Gold
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1986-10       Impact factor: 3.959

10.  Mammographic screening: how to operate successfully at low cost.

Authors:  E A Sickles; W N Weber; H B Galvin; S H Ominsky; R A Sollitto
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  1 in total

1.  Why every woman over 40 isn't in a breast cancer detection program.

Authors:  J Scott
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1988-10
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.