JAMA....Mammography...
"Conclusions and Relevance To maximize the benefit of mammography screening, decisions should be individualized based on patients’ risk profiles and preferences. Risk models and decision aids are useful tools, but more research is needed to optimize these and to further quantify overdiagnosis. Research should also explore other breast cancer screening strategies....."
http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1853165
Comments
-
So, here we go again! Following the recent BMJ study following Canadian women, another MAJOR medical journal tells us that it's time to reassess population based mammography. The American College of Radiologists and Komen have already chimed in. Their conclusion, is that until we have better tools at screening, they recommend sticking to annual mammography for ages 40 and older.
What these important studies tell us is the contrary. They believe that a woman should discuss with her physician her personal risks and benefits of mammography and choose a screening plan that works for her. This study was conducted by Harvard. The limitation of discussing individual risks and benefits is that for the majority of patients 60%, there is no way of conclusively identifying those risks.
I know that for many, Dr. Esserman is controversial figure in the mammography issue. However, following the BMJ's study of Canadian she said the following:
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/02/04/271554425/are-we-paying-8-billion-too-much-for-mammograms
I believe it's time to abandon the status quo. Population based screening mammograms save lives, but not as many lives as previously believed. It's time to have a "rational" discussion of mammography, as Dr. Otis Brawly would say. Not "rationing" of mammography, but "rational" delivery of mammography....
-
Above link is a press release from the American College of Radiologists replying to the JAMA study.
-
I'm actually a Dr Esserman fan. When it was believed that I had DCIS, I had one foot out the door & on my way to UCSF. Without people like her there will be NO progress.
-
" ... Not "rationing" of mammography, but "rational" delivery of mammography...."
That is a good way to put it. Personally, I think that it's a good idea; it approaches the problem by making it more pro-individual and ensures that those with a perceived higher risk get the care that they need.
-
... About the Canadian study that was downplaying the need for mammograms.
New Canadian website to get rid of that false information launched....on Facebook....
The Canadian National Breast Screening study has been widely discredited. The methodology of the study was flawed. The study was compromised because women received a physical examination by a trained nurse before their names were entered into the list. In addition, screening was based on outdated mammography technology that isn’t even in use today.
Huge advances have been made in breast cancer screening technology to improve the equipment, techniques, staff knowledge and expertise, and image interpretation by radiologists. The effectiveness of mammography screening has been well established by several large clinical trials. -
Lauren, what you are referring to comes directly from a press release that The American Academy of Radiologists posts each time the Canadian study releases its follow ups. To say the least, the population based screening mammography debate has become stale and tiresome. With that said, recently, I'm beginning to read more articles that are more balanced....will that small change make more clinicians and patients begin an articulation about population based mammography vs individual risk screening mammography decisions? I hope so because we all deserve better.
-
The posting was simply to share information that was on the news, telling people to go to Facebook, to check out the site for information.
Not a statement or opinion.
Just information sharing, nothing more, nothing less.
-
Lauren...please note above. I gave a link to the Radiologists' medical group's response to the Canadian study which you reiterate from Facebook.
Pointing out the Facebook link is important. It shows how both sides of the debate are trying to get out their message.
Categories
- All Categories
- 679 Advocacy and Fund-Raising
- 289 Advocacy
- 68 I've Donated to Breastcancer.org in honor of....
- Test
- 322 Walks, Runs and Fundraising Events for Breastcancer.org
- 5.6K Community Connections
- 282 Middle Age 40-60(ish) Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 53 Australians and New Zealanders Affected by Breast Cancer
- 208 Black Women or Men With Breast Cancer
- 684 Canadians Affected by Breast Cancer
- 1.5K Caring for Someone with Breast cancer
- 455 Caring for Someone with Stage IV or Mets
- 260 High Risk of Recurrence or Second Breast Cancer
- 22 International, Non-English Speakers With Breast Cancer
- 16 Latinas/Hispanics With Breast Cancer
- 189 LGBTQA+ With Breast Cancer
- 152 May Their Memory Live On
- 85 Member Matchup & Virtual Support Meetups
- 375 Members by Location
- 291 Older Than 60 Years Old With Breast Cancer
- 177 Singles With Breast Cancer
- 869 Young With Breast Cancer
- 50.4K Connecting With Others Who Have a Similar Diagnosis
- 204 Breast Cancer with Another Diagnosis or Comorbidity
- 4K DCIS (Ductal Carcinoma In Situ)
- 79 DCIS plus HER2-positive Microinvasion
- 529 Genetic Testing
- 2.2K HER2+ (Positive) Breast Cancer
- 1.5K IBC (Inflammatory Breast Cancer)
- 3.4K IDC (Invasive Ductal Carcinoma)
- 1.5K ILC (Invasive Lobular Carcinoma)
- 999 Just Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastasis
- 652 LCIS (Lobular Carcinoma In Situ)
- 193 Less Common Types of Breast Cancer
- 252 Male Breast Cancer
- 86 Mixed Type Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Not Diagnosed With a Recurrence or Metastases but Concerned
- 189 Palliative Therapy/Hospice Care
- 488 Second or Third Breast Cancer
- 1.2K Stage I Breast Cancer
- 313 Stage II Breast Cancer
- 3.8K Stage III Breast Cancer
- 2.5K Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
- 13.1K Day-to-Day Matters
- 132 All things COVID-19 or coronavirus
- 87 BCO Free-Cycle: Give or Trade Items Related to Breast Cancer
- 5.9K Clinical Trials, Research News, Podcasts, and Study Results
- 86 Coping with Holidays, Special Days and Anniversaries
- 828 Employment, Insurance, and Other Financial Issues
- 101 Family and Family Planning Matters
- Family Issues for Those Who Have Breast Cancer
- 26 Furry friends
- 1.8K Humor and Games
- 1.6K Mental Health: Because Cancer Doesn't Just Affect Your Breasts
- 706 Recipe Swap for Healthy Living
- 704 Recommend Your Resources
- 171 Sex & Relationship Matters
- 9 The Political Corner
- 874 Working on Your Fitness
- 4.5K Moving On & Finding Inspiration After Breast Cancer
- 394 Bonded by Breast Cancer
- 3.1K Life After Breast Cancer
- 806 Prayers and Spiritual Support
- 285 Who or What Inspires You?
- 28.7K Not Diagnosed But Concerned
- 1K Benign Breast Conditions
- 2.3K High Risk for Breast Cancer
- 18K Not Diagnosed But Worried
- 7.4K Waiting for Test Results
- 603 Site News and Announcements
- 560 Comments, Suggestions, Feature Requests
- 39 Mod Announcements, Breastcancer.org News, Blog Entries, Podcasts
- 4 Survey, Interview and Participant Requests: Need your Help!
- 61.9K Tests, Treatments & Side Effects
- 586 Alternative Medicine
- 255 Bone Health and Bone Loss
- 11.4K Breast Reconstruction
- 7.9K Chemotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 2.7K Complementary and Holistic Medicine and Treatment
- 775 Diagnosed and Waiting for Test Results
- 7.8K Hormonal Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 50 Immunotherapy - Before, During, and After
- 7.4K Just Diagnosed
- 1.4K Living Without Reconstruction After a Mastectomy
- 5.2K Lymphedema
- 3.6K Managing Side Effects of Breast Cancer and Its Treatment
- 591 Pain
- 3.9K Radiation Therapy - Before, During, and After
- 8.4K Surgery - Before, During, and After
- 109 Welcome to Breastcancer.org
- 98 Acknowledging and honoring our Community
- 11 Info & Resources for New Patients & Members From the Team