- 2012elections - 9/11 Special Coverage - aca - africanamericanalzheimers - aids - Alabama News Network - american - Awards & Expo - bees - bilingual - border - californiaeducation - Caribbean - cir - citizenship - climatechange - collgeinmiami - community - democrats - ecotourism - Elders - Election 2012 - elections2012 - escuelas - Ethnic Media in the News - Ethnicities - Events - Eye on Egypt - Fellowships - food - Foreclosures - Growing Up Poor in the Bay Area - Health Care Reform - healthyhungerfreekids - howtodie - humiliating - immigrants - Inside the Shadow Economy - kimjongun - Latin America - Law & Justice - Living - Media - memphismediaroundtable - Multimedia - NAM en Espaol - Politics & Governance - Religion - Richmond Pulse - Science & Technology - Sports - The Movement to Expand Health Care Access - Video - Voter Suppression - War & Conflict - 攔截盤查政策 - Top Stories - Immigration - Health - Economy - Education - Environment - Ethnic Media Headlines - International Affairs - NAM en Español - Occupy Protests - Youth Culture - Collaborative Reporting

A Doctor's Word -- Deciphering the New Mammography Guidelines

New America Media, Commentary, Erin Marcus, M.D. Posted: Nov 29, 2009

Whenever I order a mammogram for a woman in her 40s, I also give her a warning: Dont get scared if its abnormal. I tell her this because research shows that a woman who undergoes 10 routine screening mammograms has a 50-50 chance of having something unusual that requires her to go for more tests. The vast majority of these mammographic abnormalities arent cancer, but she still needs to get the additional tests, just to make sure.

So the new mammogram recommendations by the United States Preventive Services Task Force really didnt surprise me. While theres pretty good evidence that mammograms save lives in women age 50 and older, its not a great test in younger women. Women under 50 are more likely than older women to have false positive mammograms, resulting in their needing additional testing for something that turns out not to be cancer. They are also far less likely than older women to have breast cancer detected by mammograms.

When you look at the overall population, mammographys lack of precision in picking up cancer in younger women is pretty astounding. According to data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, a network of mammogram registries, 556 women in their 40s have to get a screening mammogram for the test to pick up one invasive, or potentially life-threatening, cancer. One out of a thousand screened women will have a breast cancer thats not picked up by their mammogram, while close to 1 out of 10 women in this age group will have a false positive result. For older women, the test is more precise. For example, 200 women in their 60s have to be screened to find one invasive cancer, and there are fewer false positives.

One recent academic article pointed out that even though the advent of mammography 30 years ago led to a surge in the number of women diagnosed with tiny, localized breast cancers, it hasnt significantly decreased the number of women found to have disease thats already spread to other parts of the body. If mammograms were truly effective, the articles authors argued, there should have been a bigger drop in the number of women with advanced cancer, because their disease should have been caught before it was able to spread. Some researchers contend that many of these tiny cancers, called ductal carcinomas in situ, wont grow, and, by finding them, widespread mammography has resulted in lots of women being overtreated with aggressive therapies.

Despite all these concerns, the fact remains that breast cancer kills 40,000 women in the United States every year, more than any cancer except lung cancer. Given all the questions about mammograms effectiveness, we clearly need better ways to screen women. An ideal screening test would pinpoint women who are at high risk of developing an aggressive breast cancer. This would allow doctors to monitor these women more vigilantly, perhaps with more frequent mammograms and other tests, such as ultrasounds, while those at low risk wouldnt need to be tested as often. It would also help women make a well-informed decision about whether to take medicine to prevent breast cancer.

Such tests could be especially important for black women, who are more likely than whites to develop aggressive cancers at a younger age. Routine mammograms often miss fast-growing cancers, which can pop up during the one or two year interval between screening tests.

Unfortunately, were not there yet. True, there are a few tests to identify some women at high risk, such as those who have abnormal changes, or mutations, in genes called BRCA 1 and 2. But these gene changes account for only a small fraction of breast cancers. The National Cancer Institute has a computer tool that uses information about a womans personal history to calculate her overall risk, but it only gives a very general estimate. The institute spent more than $36 million last year to fund studies looking at such tests, including one called ductal lavage, which collects cells from inside the breast. But these tests arent yet ready for widespread use.

Finally, its important to note that the new guidelines dont say women in their 40s should avoid screening mammograms. Instead, they recommend that these women talk with their doctors about mammographys benefits and harms before deciding whats best for them.

Unfortunately, given the sad state of primary care medicine today, in which doctors spend less and less time talking to patients, these conversations often dont occur. Too often, the mammogram is a test thats just ordered with little discussion and not much thought. Hopefully, the new guidelines will spur more conversations between doctors and women about what mammograms can and cant do and women will be better prepared to understand their results.

Related Articles:

Breast Cancer Research Neglects Environmental Links

Black Activists Blast Breast Cancer Guidelines

More Doctor's Word columns

Page 1 of 1




Just Posted

NAM Coverage