0
July 3, 1996, Vol 276, No. 1 >
ARTICLE | July 3, 1996

Strategies for Improving Sensitivity of Screening Mammography for Women Aged 40 to 49 Years FREE

Stephen A. Feig, MD
[+] Author Affiliations

Reprints: Stephen A. Feig, MD, Breast Imaging Center, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, 1100 Walnut St, Philadelphia, PA 19107-5563.


JAMA. 1996;276(1):73-74. doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540010075035
Text Size: A A A
Published online
Article
References

Reduction of mortality due to breast cancer among women aged 40 to 49 years represents a major challenge and opportunity for mammographic screening. The American Cancer Society estimates that in 1995 alone, some 33 800 women aged 40 to 49 years were diagnosed with breast cancer. This is 19% greater than the number of women who were diagnosed between the ages of 50 and 59 years (28 300) and 18% fewer than the number of women diagnosed between the ages of 60 and 69 years (41300).1 It has been estimated that almost 20% of all deaths due to breast cancer and 34% of all the expected years of life lost due to breast cancer result from breast cancers found among women aged 40 to 49 years.2

See also pp 33 and 39.

Proof of benefit from screening women in any age group can come only from a randomized

REFERENCES

1 +
Smith RA.  The epidemiology of breast cancer . In: Kopans DB, Mendelson EB, eds. Syllabus: A Categorical Course in Breast Imaging . Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America; 1995;:7-20.
2 +
Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L. Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae, 1963-1986 . Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1988;:12-13, 86.
3 +
Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH III, Smith RA.  Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40-49 years: current evidence from randomized controlled trials . Cancer . 1995;;75:1619-1626.
4 +
Correction: Cancer . 1995;;75:2788.
5 +
Shapiro S.  Screening: assessment of current studies . Cancer . 1994;;74:231-238.
6 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen H-H, et al.  Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age: new results from the Swedish Two-Country Trial . Cancer . 1995;;75:997-1003.
7 +
Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles E A, Ernster V.  Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography . JAMA . 1996;;276:33-38.
8 +
Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V.  Likelihood ratios for modern screening mammography: risk of breast cancer based on age and mammographic interpretation . JAMA . 1996;;276:39-43.
9 +
Feig SA, Shaber GS, Patchefsky A, et al.  Analysis of clinically occult and mammographically occult breast lesions . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1977;;128:403-408.
10 +
Wolfe JN.  A study of breast parenchyma by mammography in the normal woman and those with benign and malignant disease . Radiology . 1967;;89:201-205.
11 +
Kopans DB.  Conventional wisdom: observation, experience, anecdote, and science in breast imaging . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1994;;162:299-303.
12 +
Smart CR.  Highlights of the evidence ofbenefit for women aged 40-49 years from the 14-year follow-up of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project . Cancer . 1994;;74:296-300.
13 +
Curpen BN, Sickles EA, Sollito RA, Ominsky SH, Galvin HB, Frankel SD.  The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1995;;164:1099-1103.
14 +
Thurfjell EL, Lindgren JA.  Population-based mammography screening in Swedish clinical practice: prevalence and incidence screening in Uppsala Country . Radiology . 1994;;193:351-358.
15 +
Feig SA.  Determination of mammographic screening intervals with surrogate measures for women age 40-49 years . Radiology . 1994;;193:311-314.
16 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Gronthoft O.  Update of the Swedish Two-County Program of mammographic screening for breast cancer . Radiol Clin North Am . 1992;;30:187-210.
17 +
Feig S.  Estimation of currently attainable benefit from mammographic screening of women aged 40-49 years . Cancer . 1995;;75:2412-2419.
18 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L.  W is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? an analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish Two-County Breast Screening Trial . Br J Cancer . 1987;;55:547-551.
19 +
Moskowitz M.  Breast cancer: age-Specific growth rates and screening strategies . Radiology . 1994;;161:37-41.
20 +
Feig SA.  Mammographic screening of women aged 40-49 years: benefit, risk, and cost considerations . Cancer . 1995;;76:2097-2106.
21 +
Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ.  The cost-effectiveness of mammographic screening strategies . JAMA . 1995;;274:881-884.

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

1 +
Smith RA.  The epidemiology of breast cancer . In: Kopans DB, Mendelson EB, eds. Syllabus: A Categorical Course in Breast Imaging . Oak Brook, Ill: Radiological Society of North America; 1995;:7-20.
2 +
Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L. Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae, 1963-1986 . Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1988;:12-13, 86.
3 +
Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH III, Smith RA.  Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40-49 years: current evidence from randomized controlled trials . Cancer . 1995;;75:1619-1626.
4 +
Correction: Cancer . 1995;;75:2788.
5 +
Shapiro S.  Screening: assessment of current studies . Cancer . 1994;;74:231-238.
6 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen H-H, et al.  Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age: new results from the Swedish Two-Country Trial . Cancer . 1995;;75:997-1003.
7 +
Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles E A, Ernster V.  Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography . JAMA . 1996;;276:33-38.
8 +
Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V.  Likelihood ratios for modern screening mammography: risk of breast cancer based on age and mammographic interpretation . JAMA . 1996;;276:39-43.
9 +
Feig SA, Shaber GS, Patchefsky A, et al.  Analysis of clinically occult and mammographically occult breast lesions . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1977;;128:403-408.
10 +
Wolfe JN.  A study of breast parenchyma by mammography in the normal woman and those with benign and malignant disease . Radiology . 1967;;89:201-205.
11 +
Kopans DB.  Conventional wisdom: observation, experience, anecdote, and science in breast imaging . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1994;;162:299-303.
12 +
Smart CR.  Highlights of the evidence ofbenefit for women aged 40-49 years from the 14-year follow-up of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project . Cancer . 1994;;74:296-300.
13 +
Curpen BN, Sickles EA, Sollito RA, Ominsky SH, Galvin HB, Frankel SD.  The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old . AJR Am J Roentgenol . 1995;;164:1099-1103.
14 +
Thurfjell EL, Lindgren JA.  Population-based mammography screening in Swedish clinical practice: prevalence and incidence screening in Uppsala Country . Radiology . 1994;;193:351-358.
15 +
Feig SA.  Determination of mammographic screening intervals with surrogate measures for women age 40-49 years . Radiology . 1994;;193:311-314.
16 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Gronthoft O.  Update of the Swedish Two-County Program of mammographic screening for breast cancer . Radiol Clin North Am . 1992;;30:187-210.
17 +
Feig S.  Estimation of currently attainable benefit from mammographic screening of women aged 40-49 years . Cancer . 1995;;75:2412-2419.
18 +
Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L.  W is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? an analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish Two-County Breast Screening Trial . Br J Cancer . 1987;;55:547-551.
19 +
Moskowitz M.  Breast cancer: age-Specific growth rates and screening strategies . Radiology . 1994;;161:37-41.
20 +
Feig SA.  Mammographic screening of women aged 40-49 years: benefit, risk, and cost considerations . Cancer . 1995;;76:2097-2106.
21 +
Lindfors KK, Rosenquist CJ.  The cost-effectiveness of mammographic screening strategies . JAMA . 1995;;274:881-884.

Letters

Submit a Letter
CME Course for:


You need to register in order to view this quiz.


To understand the clinical management of acute heart failure syndromes.
Accreditation Information The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
To view and print your certificate and access a summary of your CME courses go to My CME.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s “Cited By” API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Compression-Only CPR: Pushing the Science Forward
Cone
AAM 2010;304:1493-1495.
All you need to read in the other general journals
BMJ 2010;341:c5893-c1494.
Submit a Response

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

© 2012 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
Powered bySilverchair Information Systems