Objective: Our aim was to determine the screening recommendations that breast radiologists promote to average-risk patients and family or friends and do or would follow for themselves.
Materials And Methods: A survey of breast radiologists in the United States collected data regarding their personal and practice backgrounds, their recommendations to others for mammography and clinical and self-breast examination, and their personal screening habits based on respondent sex. The radiologists were divided into three cohorts: women 40 years old or older (group 1), women younger than 40 years (group 2), and men (group 3). The distribution of responses for each question was summarized, and proportions of total radiologists and cohorts were computed.
Results: Four hundred eighty-seven surveys were collected. None of the radiologists recommended biennial mammography for patients ages 50-74 years, 98% (477/487) recommended yearly mammography for patients 40 years old and older, and 99% (470/476) recommended yearly mammography for family and friends 40 years old and older. The most common reasons for variance were institutional policy or provider preferences. In group 1, 96% (191/198) have yearly mammography. In group 2, 100% (83/83) have or will have yearly mammography at age 40 years and beyond. In group 3, 97% (171/176) would have yearly mammography at age 40 years and beyond if they were women. Overall, 97% (445/457) of radiologists have or would have yearly mammography at age 40 years and beyond.
Conclusion: Nearly all (98%) of the radiologists recommend yearly mammography for average-risk women 40 years old and older and were consistent in that they "practice what they preach." Because radiologists diagnose all stages of breast cancer, their personal convictions should influence providers, patients, and the public when considering the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force screening guidelines.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://dx.doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.13237 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Comparing the cost-benefit of breast cancer screening programs in rural and urban areas across four economic zones in China: a Markov modeling analysis.
BMC Public Health
January 2025
Center for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, 211198, China.
Background: This study assessed the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening across rural and urban regions in China's four economic zones.
Methods: Using a decision-analytic Markov model, we evaluated 5,280 scenarios involving different ages and screening technologies. The model followed individuals from birth through 100 yearly cycles in eight settings.
Tumour growth rate and invasive interval cancer characteristics in a UK breast cancer screening population.
Eur Radiol
January 2025
Department of Radiology, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Objectives: To estimate tumour volume doubling time (TVDT) of interval cancers (ICs).
Methods: Two radiologists retrospectively reviewed prior screening and diagnostic mammograms and measured mean diameter on "visible" ICs. Univariate analyses of clinicopathological variables (ER, HER2, grade, age at diagnosis, and breast density) were undertaken, and those with p < 0.
Updates in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis.
Curr Treat Options Oncol
November 2024
Department of Medicine, Hematology Oncology, Endeavor Health, 2650 Ridge Avenue, Evanston, IL, 60201, USA.
Breast cancer does not wait until a woman reaches her 50's to strike. One in six cases occurs in women between the ages of 40 and 49 and breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women under 50 in the United States (10% of breast cancer deaths), emphasizing the urgency of early detection (American Society. 2024).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAtypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in-situ, flat epithelial atypia, and future risk of developing breast cancer: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Breast
December 2024
The Daffodil Centre, University of Sydney, a Joint Venture with Cancer Council NSW, Sydney, Australia; School of Public Health, Faculty of Health and Medicine, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Background: Biopsy-proven breast lesions such as atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH), lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and flat epithelial atypia (FEA) increase subsequent risk of breast cancer (BC), but long-term risk has not been synthesized. A systematic review was conducted to quantify future risk of breast cancer accounting for time since diagnosis of these high-risk lesions.
Methods: A systematic search of literature from 2000 was performed to identify studies reporting BC as an outcome following core-needle or excision biopsy histology diagnosis of ADH, ALH, LCIS, lobular neoplasia (LN) or FEA.
Cost-Effectiveness of AI for Risk-Stratified Breast Cancer Screening.
JAMA Netw Open
September 2024
Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Importance: Previous research has shown good discrimination of short-term risk using an artificial intelligence (AI) risk prediction model (Mirai). However, no studies have been undertaken to evaluate whether this might translate into economic gains.
Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of incorporating risk-stratified screening using a breast cancer AI model into the United Kingdom (UK) National Breast Cancer Screening Program.
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!