Research News: Canadians Pan Mammography for Women in Their 40s

Moderators

Canadians Pan Mammography for Women in Their 40s
November 21, 2011
A Canadian task force has recommended that routine screening mammograms should start at age 50 instead of age 40. Read more...

Sign up for our Email Updates to get BCO's newsletter featuring all our Research News stories each month, as well as other happenings at BCO.

voraciousreader

You're late to the party....we're already discussing it on other links....

hrf

i think this is disgusting considering all the young women who are being dx. Is this just a ploy to save money. Or are women now being considered expendable?

voraciousreader

  Editorial 11/22/11  Journal of The National Cancer Institute:

  

Cancer Screening Reform NeededSince the National Cancer Institute developed the first guidelines on mammography screening over thirty years ago, advocacy                  and professional groups have developed guidelines focused on who should be screened, instead of communicating clearly the                  risks and benefits of screening, according to a commentary by Michael Edward Stefanek, Ph.D., the associate vice president                  of collaborative research in the office of the vice president at Indiana University, published online Nov. 21 in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Stefanek writes that too much time has been spent debating guidelines, instead of ongoing debates about who should be screened.                  He advocates educating people about the potential harms and benefits of screening.               The U.S. Preventative Task Force (USPTS) recommendations against routine mammography for women aged 40-49 sparked controversy                  followed by more studies on screening, notably a Norwegian study comparing cancer-specific mortality in screened and unscreened                  women, which found a small and statistically insignificant breast cancer mortality reduction in the screened group. Stefanek                  writes that "similar ambiguity" exists for prostate cancer screening, noting that the two largest and high quality studies                  gave conflicting results, with the USPTS recently issuing recommendations against PSA testing in healthy men. The National                  Lung Cancer Screening Trial reported a 20% relative decrease in lung cancer deaths among subjects undergoing CT scans compared                  with those receiving chest x-rays, but with the majority of positive results being false positives. Overall this situation                  leads Stefanek to the conclusion that despite all the analyses to date, we are on unsteady ground when we attempt to dictate                  who should and shouldn't undergo screening.               Stefanek poses the question of what we have taught the public about cancer screening, since the public invariably seems to                  feel that screening is almost always a good idea and that finding cancer early is the key to saving lives. He cautions that                  the public may persist in holding a biased view of screening if we continue to engage in guideline debates. Furthermore, new                  technologies, despite the potential for combating cancer, will likely result in false positives, false negatives, overtreatment,                  and under treatment, and incur important patient harms.               Stefanek writes that we have failed to truly educate the public about cancer screening, and that our approach to screening                  needs to be reformed. He says engaging patients in shared decision making, tracking the number of patients provided with information                  related to the harms and benefits of screening instead of just those who are screened, and uniting scientific and advocacy                  organizations with primary care provider organizations in this effort to inform about costs and benefits is needed. "If we                  agree on the premise that individuals are supposed to be informed before making medical decisions, including decisions about                  cancer screening, then the time and talent of such groups could be much better spent educating the public on the harms and                  benefits of cancer screening," Stefanek writes. "Screening can be very beneficial (or not), and screening messages should                  reflect the complexity of this decision."              

voraciousreader

Penn Medicine Physicians Receive Five-Year, $7.5 Million Grant
for Breast Cancer Screening Research from the National Cancer Institute
(PHILADELPHIA) - University of Pennsylvania researchers have received a
five-year, $7.5 million grant from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) to create
the Penn Center for Innovation in Personalized Breast Cancer Screening (PCIPS),
dedicated to studying emerging methods of breast cancer detection. The NCI
funding will allow the team, led by Perelman School of
Medicine faculty Katrina
Armstrong, MD, MSCE, chief of the
division of Internal Medicine and associate director of
Outcomes and Delivery in the Abramson Cancer Center,
and Mitchell
Schnall, MD, PhD, Matthew J. Wilson Professor of Radiology, to use
clinical, genomic and imaging information to guide the use of novel,
personalized breast cancer screening strategies that will reduce false positive
rates to improve outcomes." The research, which also involves researchers from
medical oncology, psychiatry, and colleagues in the Annenberg School for
Communication and the Wharton School, will be conducted through August 2016.
PCIPS research is three-fold. First, they will aim to improve breast cancer
screening by creating a new "breast complexity index" to predict individual
screening outcomes. Second, the team will also compare the effectiveness of new
imaging technology, including digital breast tomosynthesis compared to
conventional mammography. Third, they will create new strategies for
communicating individual estimates of benefit and risk of
alternative screening methods to better inform patients and health care
providers.
  
Along with these three projects, the Center will study
outcome data of a diverse group of 74,000 women who undergo breast cancer
screening at six sites in Penn Medicine's integrated health network. The center
will use resources in breast imaging, primary care, communication, computer
science, biostatistics, health services research, bioinformatics, medical
oncology, cancer genetics and clinical leadership to advance the breast cancer
screening process and encourage collaboration through NCI's Population-based
Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR)
network.