Cancers detected and induced, and associated risk and benefit, in a breast screening programme

J, Law; Faulkner, K.

doi:10.1259/bjr.74.888.741121

Cited by 62 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A two-view mammogram, i.e., two photos per breast, uses 4 mGy average radiation dose. 5 The breast cancer induction risk due to mammography radiation was 0.0000165 under the age of 50, and 0.0000114 over the age of 50 (28).…”

Section: Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Cancer Screening, Outside the Population-Screening Program, of Women from Breast Cancer Families without Proven BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations: a Simulation Study

Jacobi

Nagelkerke²,

Houwelingen³

et al. 2006

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for women under the age of 50, from breast cancer families without proven BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, because current criteria for screening healthy women from breast cancer families are not evidence-based. Methods: We did simulation studies with mathematical models on the cost-effectiveness of mammography screening of women under the age of 50 with breast cancer family histories. Breast cancer screening was simulated with varying screening intervals (6, 12, 18, and 24 months) and screening cohorts (starting at ages 30, 35, 40, and 45, and continuing to age 50). Incremental costs of screening were compared with those of women ages 50 to 52 years, the youngest age group currently routinely screened in the nationwide screening program of the Netherlands, to determine cost-effectiveness. Sensitivity analyses were done to explore the effects of model assumptions. The cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening for women over the age of 50 was not debated. Results: The most effective screening interval was found to be 12 months, which, however, seems only to be costeffective in a small group of women under the age of 50 with at least two affected relatives, including at least one affected in the first degree diagnosed under the age of 50. Significantly, early breast cancer screening never seemed to be costeffective in women with only one affected first-degree or second-degree relative. Conclusion: Annual breast cancer screening with mammography for women under the age of 50 seems to be costeffective in women with strong family histories of breast cancer, even when no BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation was found in affected family members. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(3):429 -36)

show abstract

Section: Valuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breast Cancer Screening, Outside the Population-Screening Program, of Women from Breast Cancer Families without Proven BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations: a Simulation Study

Jacobi

Nagelkerke²,

Houwelingen³

et al. 2006

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The estimated risk associated with radiation will depend on whether a linear or quadratic dose response model is chosen, and on whether an additive or relative risk model is used. The average radiation dose for mammography has reduced considerably over the past 15-20 years, and most recent studies have estimated that the benefit of screening is likely to outweigh the risk even in younger women (Law and Faulkner, 2001). Estimates of the average received dose in the UK Age trial are of 2.5 mGy per oblique film and 2.0 mGy per craniocaudal film (Young, 2001); in this study, age was not found to be a significant factor affecting the dose to screened women aged above or below 50 years.…”

Section: Exposure To Radiationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should women under 50 be screened for breast cancer?

Moss

2004

Br J Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite some controversy in recent years, the majority of experts agree on the evidence for effectiveness of breast screening by mammography for women aged 50 years and above, but for those under 50 years, the picture is much less clear. However, the issue remains of importance both to policy makers and to individual women; although the incidence of breast cancer is lower at younger ages, the life years lost due to cancers diagnosed below 50 years amount to a third of all those lost due to the disease. This article summarises the current position in different countries, and reviews the most recent evidence on effectiveness of screening women below 50 years from randomised trials. It has not been conducted as a systematic review or meta-analysis, of which a number have been performed. It also addresses the range of potential disadvantages of screening with particular reference to this age group.

show abstract

“…Because stage of the disease at diagnosis is associated with prognosis, efficient diagnostic tools for early detection are keys to survival. Although mammography is the most reliable way to detect breast cancer, it has some limitations (2)(3)(4). Biopsy is the method used to establish a definitive diagnosis, but it is an invasive procedure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tumor MicroRNA Expression Profiling Identifies Circulating MicroRNAs for Early Breast Cancer Detection

Vargas²,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Cancers detected and induced, and associated risk and benefit, in a breast screening programme

Cited by 62 publications

References 6 publications

Breast Cancer Screening, Outside the Population-Screening Program, of Women from Breast Cancer Families without Proven BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations: a Simulation Study

Breast Cancer Screening, Outside the Population-Screening Program, of Women from Breast Cancer Families without Proven BRCA1/BRCA2 Mutations: a Simulation Study

Should women under 50 be screened for breast cancer?

Tumor MicroRNA Expression Profiling Identifies Circulating MicroRNAs for Early Breast Cancer Detection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About