Literature DB >> 36192515

The Landmark Series-Addressing Disparities in Breast Cancer Screening: New Recommendations for Black Women.

Oluwadamilola M Fayanju1,2,3,4, Christine E Edmonds2,5, Sylvia A Reyes6,7,8, Cletus Arciero9, Vivian J Bea10, Angelena Crown11, Kathie-Ann Joseph12,13.   

Abstract

Randomized, clinical trials have established the efficacy of screening mammography in improving survival from breast cancer for women through detection of early, asymptomatic disease. However, disparities in survival rates between black women and women from other racial and ethnic groups following breast cancer diagnosis persist. Various professional groups have different, somewhat conflicting, guidelines with regards to recommended age for commencing screening as well as recommended frequency of screening exams, but the trials upon which these recommendations are based were not specifically designed to examine benefit among black women. Furthermore, these recommendations do not appear to incorporate the unique epidemiological circumstances of breast cancer among black women, including higher rates of diagnosis before age 40 years and greater likelihood of advanced stage at diagnosis, into their formulation. In this review, we examined the epidemiologic and socioeconomic factors that are associated with breast cancer among black women and assess the implications of these factors for screening in this population. Specifically, we recommend that by no later than age 25 years, all black women should undergo baseline assessment for future risk of breast cancer utilizing a model that incorporates race (e.g., Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool [BCRAT], formerly the Gail model) and that this assessment should be conducted by a breast specialist or a healthcare provider (e.g., primary care physician or gynecologist) who is trained to assess breast cancer risk and is aware of the increased risks of early (i.e., premenopausal) and biologically aggressive (e.g., late-stage, triple-negative) breast cancer among black women.
© 2022. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 36192515     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12535-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   4.339


  37 in total

1.  Neglecting to screen women between 40 and 49 years old with mammography: what is the impact on treatment morbidity and potential risk reduction?

Authors:  Donna Plecha; Nelly Salem; Mallory Kremer; Ramya Pham; Catherine Downs-Holmes; Abdus Sattar; Janice Lyons
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  United States Preventive Services Task Force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored.

Authors:  R Edward Hendrick; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Comparison of recommendations for screening mammography using CISNET models.

Authors:  Elizabeth Kagan Arleo; R Edward Hendrick; Mark A Helvie; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2017-08-21       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Mammography in 40-year-old women: what difference does it make? The potential impact of the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) mammography guidelines.

Authors:  Nicole Shen; Linda Sue Hammonds; Dick Madsen; Paul Dale
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-08-24       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Insights from the breast cancer screening trials: how screening affects the natural history of breast cancer and implications for evaluating service screening programs.

Authors:  László Tabár; Amy Ming-Fang Yen; Wendy Yi-Ying Wu; Sam Li-Sheng Chen; Sherry Yueh-Hsia Chiu; Jean Ching-Yuan Fann; May Mei-Sheng Ku; Robert A Smith; Stephen W Duffy; Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2014-11-20       Impact factor: 2.431

6.  Breast Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Women: Recommendations From the ACR Commission on Breast Imaging.

Authors:  Debra L Monticciolo; Mary S Newell; R Edward Hendrick; Mark A Helvie; Linda Moy; Barbara Monsees; Daniel B Kopans; Peter R Eby; Edward A Sickles
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 5.532

7.  Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography.

Authors:  Sarah M Friedewald; Elizabeth A Rafferty; Stephen L Rose; Melissa A Durand; Donna M Plecha; Julianne S Greenberg; Mary K Hayes; Debra S Copit; Kara L Carlson; Thomas M Cink; Lora D Barke; Linda N Greer; Dave P Miller; Emily F Conant
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Five Consecutive Years of Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Outcomes by Screening Year and Round.

Authors:  Emily F Conant; Samantha P Zuckerman; Elizabeth S McDonald; Susan P Weinstein; Katrina E Korhonen; Julia A Birnbaum; Jennifer D Tobey; Mitchell D Schnall; Rebecca A Hubbard
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2020-03-10       Impact factor: 11.105

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

Authors:  Kevin C Oeffinger; Elizabeth T H Fontham; Ruth Etzioni; Abbe Herzig; James S Michaelson; Ya-Chen Tina Shih; Louise C Walter; Timothy R Church; Christopher R Flowers; Samuel J LaMonte; Andrew M D Wolf; Carol DeSantis; Joannie Lortet-Tieulent; Kimberly Andrews; Deana Manassaram-Baptiste; Debbie Saslow; Robert A Smith; Otis W Brawley; Richard Wender
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  The incidence of fatal breast cancer measures the increased effectiveness of therapy in women participating in mammography screening.

Authors:  László Tabár; Peter B Dean; Tony Hsiu-Hsi Chen; Amy Ming-Fang Yen; Sam Li-Sheng Chen; Jean Ching-Yuan Fann; Sherry Yueh-Hsia Chiu; May Mei-Sheng Ku; Wendy Yi-Ying Wu; Chen-Yang Hsu; Yu-Ching Chen; Kerri Beckmann; Robert A Smith; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 6.860

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.