Advertisement
ADVANCED SEARCH

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) [Français] Submit a response View responses Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ringash, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ringash, J. Related Collections Clinical Practice Guidelines

Preventive health care, 2001 update: screening mammography among women aged 40–49 years at average risk of breast cancer

Dr. Ringash is Assistant Professor in the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Health Administration, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont.

Objective: A previous review by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (now the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care) in 1994 indicated fair evidence to exclude mammographic breast cancer screening of women aged 40–49 from the periodic health examination. This current review considers the available new and updated evidence regarding the effect of screening mammography on breast cancer mortality among women in this age group at average risk of breast cancer.

Options: Screening mammography starting at either age 40 or age 50.

Outcome: Reduction in breast cancer mortality.

Evidence: The MEDLINE and CANCERLIT databases were searched for relevant articles published from 1966 to January 2000. Of 68 references obtained, at least 22 were published after the 1994 review. To date, the only trial designed to assess the mortality benefits of screening mammography among women aged 40–49 did not have adequate power to exclude a clinically significant benefit. Other results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are post-hoc subgroup analyses of larger trials.

Benefits, harms and costs: Screening mammography offers the potential for significant benefits in addition to mortality reduction, including early diagnosis, less aggressive therapy and improved cosmetic results. However, the risks of screening include increased biopsy rates and the psychological effects of false reassurance or false-positive results. Although several of the trials reviewed constitute level I evidence (RCT), at present their conflicting results, methodologic differences and, most important, uncertainty about the risk:benefit ratio of screening precludes the assignment of a "good" or "fair" rating to recommendations drawn from them.

Values: The strength of evidence was evaluated using the methods of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. A high value was placed on changes in survival. When evidence was available, value was also placed on potential quality-of-life implications.

Recommendation: Current evidence regarding the effectiveness of screening mammography does not suggest the inclusion of the manoeuvre in, or its exclusion from, the periodic health examination of women aged 40–49 years at average risk of breast cancer (grade C recommendation). Upon reaching the age of 40, Canadian women should be informed of the potential benefits and risks of screening mammography and assisted in deciding at what age they wish to initiate the manoeuvre.

Validation: The findings of this analysis were reviewed through an iterative process by the members of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

Sponsors: The Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care is funded through a partnership between the Provincial and Territorial Ministries of Health and Health Canada.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement Ann Intern Med, November 17, 2009; 151(10): 716 - 726. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Wang, X. N. Jason, and R. E.G. Upshur Determining use of preventive health care in Ontario: Comparison of rates of 3 maneuvers in administrative and survey data Can Fam Physician, February 1, 2009; 55(2): 178 - 179.e5. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K M Blackmore, J A Knight, R Jong, and L Lilge Assessing breast tissue density by transillumination breast spectroscopy (TIBS): an intermediate indicator of cancer risk Br. J. Radiol., July 1, 2007; 80(955): 545 - 556. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Qaseem, V. Snow, K. Sherif, M. Aronson, K. B. Weiss, D. K. Owens, and for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee Screening Mammography for Women 40 to 49 Years of Age: A Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians Ann Intern Med, April 3, 2007; 146(7): 511 - 515. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. S.M. Buist, E. J. Aiello, D. L. Miglioretti, and E. White Mammographic Breast Density, Dense Area, and Breast Area Differences by Phase in the Menstrual Cycle. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., November 1, 2006; 15(11): 2303 - 2306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Paskett, C. Tatum, J. Rushing, R. Michielutte, R. Bell, K. L. Foley, M. Bittoni, S. L. Dickinson, A. S. McAlearney, and K. Reeves Randomized trial of an intervention to improve mammography utilization among a triracial rural population of women. J Natl Cancer Inst, September 6, 2006; 98(17): 1226 - 1237. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Chew, J. Mandelbaum-Schmid, and S. K. Gao Can Health Journalists Bridge the State-of-the-Science Gap in Mammography Guidelines? Science Communication, March 1, 2006; 27(3): 331 - 351. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. E. Lafata, J. Simpkins, L. Lamerato, L. Poisson, G. Divine, and C. C. Johnson The Economic Impact of False-Positive Cancer Screens Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2004; 13(12): 2126 - 2132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. S. M. Buist, P. L. Porter, C. Lehman, S. H. Taplin, and E. White Factors Contributing to Mammography Failure in Women Aged 40-49 Years J Natl Cancer Inst, October 6, 2004; 96(19): 1432 - 1440. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Willis Personal choice/social responsibility: Women aged 40-49 years and mammography screening Journal of Sociology, June 1, 2004; 40(2): 121 - 136. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Kerlikowske, R. Smith-Bindman, B.-M. Ljung, and D. Grady Evaluation of Abnormal Mammography Results and Palpable Breast Abnormalities Ann Intern Med, August 19, 2003; 139(4): 274 - 284. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Hoey Mammography screening among women aged 40-49 years shows no benefit Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 15, 2002; 167(8): 898 - 898. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. L. Humphrey, M. Helfand, B. K.S. Chan, and S. H. Woolf Breast Cancer Screening: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ann Intern Med, September 3, 2002; 137(5_Part_1): 347 - 360. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				ADDITIONAL ARTICLES ABSTRACTED IN ACP JOURNAL CLUB Evid. Based Med., September 1, 2001; 6(5): 132 - 132. [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. Baxter Preventive health care, 2001 update: Should women be routinely taught breast self-examination to screen for breast cancer? Can. Med. Assoc. J., June 1, 2001; 164(13): 1837 - 1846. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Lemelin, W. Hogg, and N. Baskerville Evidence to action: a tailored multifaceted approach to changing family physician practice patterns and improving preventive care Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 1, 2001; 164(6): 757 - 763. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Corrections Can. Med. Assoc. J., March 1, 2001; 164(6): 753 - 753. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. B. Barton Screening mammography for women aged 40-49: Are we off the fence yet? Can. Med. Assoc. J., February 1, 2001; 164(4): 498 - 499. [Full Text] [PDF]

eLetters:

HOME	CURRENT ISSUE	PAST ISSUES	COLLECTIONS	HELP	SEARCH
Copyright 1995-2001, Canadian Medical Association. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p) All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association.