Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Role of Screening Mammography in Early Detection/Outcome of Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Microinvasive/Borderline Breast Cancer

Abstract

Mammography is the gold standard for breast cancer screening. This chapter addresses the historic scientific randomized controlled trials demonstrating the benefit of screening mammography in the early detection of invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and the numerous recent observational and computer modeling studies that have confirmed this positive effect. Since screening began in the 1980s, mammography has been shown to decrease mortality from breast cancer by anywhere from 15 to 58 %. Late-stage disease and node positivity have similarly decreased. Controversy as to the extent of benefit and the harms of mammography exists and the controversy regarding mammographic screening is presented. Major US medical societies agree that screening mammography is beneficial and they have issued guidelines for screening. The greatest discussions exist regarding when to start and how frequently it should be performed. Scientific analysis of different schedules of age to start and screening interval is presented. Overdiagnosis of breast cancer is discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Obuchowski NA, Graham RJ, Baker ME, Powell KA. Ten criteria for effective screening: their application to multislice CT screening for pulmonary and colorectal cancers. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(6):1357–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. ACS. American Cancer Society. 2014 [01/29/2014]. http://www.cancer.org/.

  3. NCI. Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). 2014 [cited 02/07/2014]. http://breastscreening.cancer.gov/.

  4. Smith RA, D’Orsi C, Newell MS. Screening for breast cancer. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK, editors. Diseases of the breast, section III, breast imaging and image-guided biopsy techniques. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2010. pp. 87–115.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cox B, Sneyd MJ. Bias in breast cancer research in the screening era. Breast. 2013;22(6):1041–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK. Diseases of the Breast. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. 2010; Ch. 11, p. 89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Tabar L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987;55(5):547–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42(5):793–806, v.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Demissie K, Mills OF, Rhoads GG. Empirical comparison of the results of randomized controlled trials and case-control studies in evaluating the effectiveness of screening mammography. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(2):81–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L, et al. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):727–37, W237–42.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Olsen O, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. 2001;358(9290):1340–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Miller AB, Wall C, Baines CJ, Sun P, To T, Narod SA Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian national breast screening study: randomised screening trial. BMJ. 2014;348:g366.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nickson C, Mason K, English DR, Kavanagh AM. Mammographic screening and breast cancer mortality: a case-control study and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012;21(9):1479–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Paci E, Group EW. Summary of the evidence of breast cancer service screening outcomes in Europe and first estimate of the benefit and harm balance sheet. J Med Screen. 2012;19(Suppl 1):5–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sigurdsson K, Olafsdottir EJ. Population-based service mammography screening: the Icelandic experience. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2013;5:17–25.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Paap E, Verbeek AL, Botterweck AA, van Doorne-Nagtegaal HJ, Imhof-Tas M, de Koning HJ, et al. Breast cancer screening halves the risk of breast cancer death: a case-referent study. Breast. 2014;23(4):439–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Foca F, Mancini S, Bucchi L, Puliti D, Zappa M, Naldoni C, et al. Decreasing incidence of late-stage breast cancer after the introduction of organized mammography screening in Italy. Cancer. 2013;119(11):2022–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Helvie MA, Chang JT, Hendrick RE, Banerjee M Reduction in late-stage breast cancer incidence in the mammography era: implications for overdiagnosis of invasive cancer. Cancer. 2014;120:2649–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, Fryback DG, Clarke L, Zelen M, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1784–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Vervoort MM, Draisma G, Fracheboud J, van de Poll-Franse LV, de Koning HJ. Trends in the usage of adjuvant systemic therapy for breast cancer in the Netherlands and its effect on mortality. Br J Cancer. 2004;91(2):242–7.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hendrick RE, Helvie MA. United States preventive services task force screening mammography recommendations: science ignored. Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(2):W112–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Cady B, Michaelson JS, Chung MA. The “tipping point” for breast cancer mortality decline has resulted from size reductions due to mammographic screening. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(4):903–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang AT, Fan J, Van Houten HK, Tilburt JC, Stout NK, Montori VM, et al. Impact of the 2009 US preventive services task force guidelines on screening mammography rates on women in their 40s. PloS ONE. 2014;9(3):e91399.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Sprague BL, Bolton KC, Mace JL, Herschorn SD, James TA, Vacek PM, et al. Registry-based study of trends in breast cancer screening mammography before and after the 2009 U.S. preventive services task force recommendations. Radiology. 2014;270(2):354–61.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pace LE, He Y, Keating NL. Trends in mammography screening rates after publication of the 2009 US preventive services task force recommendations. Cancer. 2013;119(14):2518–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Martin N, Wingfield J. USPSTF screening recommendations for breast cancer: the potential impact on the African American community. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2012;23(2 Suppl):91–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gunsoy NB, Garcia-Closas M, Moss SM. Modelling the overdiagnosis of breast cancer due to mammography screening in women aged 40 to 49 in the United Kingdom. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14(6):R152.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Webb ML, Cady B, Michaelson JS, Bush DM, Calvillo KZ, Kopans DB, et al. A failure analysis of invasive breast cancer: Most deaths from disease occur in women not regularly screened. Cancer. 2014; Sept 15;120(18):2839–2846.

    Google Scholar 

  29. van Ravesteyn NT,M, Buist DS, et al. Tipping the balance of benefits and harms to favor screening mammography starting at age 40 years: a comparative modeling study of risk. Ann Intern Med. 2012;156(9):609–17.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Plecha D, Salem N, Kremer M, Pham R, Downs-Holmes C, Sattar A, et al. Neglecting to screen women between 40 and 49 years old with mammography: what is the impact on treatment morbidity and potential risk reduction? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(2):282–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Bradley CJ, Neumark D, Shickle LM, Farrell N. Differences in breast cancer diagnosis and treatment: experiences of insured and uninsured women in a safety-net setting. Inquiry. 2008;45(3):323–39.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S, Berry DA, de Koning HJ, Draisma G, et al. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(10):738–47.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Michaelson JS, Halpern E, Kopans DB. Breast cancer: computer simulation method for estimating optimal intervals for screening. Radiology. 1999;212(2):551–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Onitilo AA, Engel JM, Liang H, Stankowski RV, Miskowiak DA, Broton M, et al. Mammography utilization: patient characteristics and breast cancer stage at diagnosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201(5):1057–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Barton MB, Elmore JG, Fletcher SW. Breast symptoms among women enrolled in a health maintenance organization: frequency, evaluation, and outcome. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130(8):651–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Puliti D, Duffy SW, Miccinesi G, de Koning H, Lynge E, Zappa M, et al. Overdiagnosis in mammographic screening for breast cancer in Europe: a literature review. J Med Screen. 2012;19(Suppl 1):42–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Land CE, Tokunaga M, Koyama K, Soda M, Preston DL, Nishimori I, et al. Incidence of female breast cancer among atomic bomb survivors, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1950–1990. Radiat Res. 2003;160(6):707–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. de Gelder R, Draisma G, Heijnsdijk EA, de Koning HJ. Population-based mammography screening below age 50: balancing radiation-induced vs prevented breast cancer deaths. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(7):1214–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC, Newell MS, Bailey L, Barke LD, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria breast cancer screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2013;10(1):11–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Sickles EA. The use of breast imaging to screen women at high risk for cancer. Radiol Clin North Am. 2010;48(5):859–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1773–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Lynge E, Ponti A, James T, Majek O, von Euler-Chelpin M, Anttila A, et al. Variation in detection of ductal carcinoma in situ during screening mammography: a survey within the international cancer screening network. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(1):185–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Shamliyan T, Kane RL. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review of incidence, treatment, and outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(3):170–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Li CI, Daling JR, Malone KE. Age-specific incidence rates of in situ breast carcinomas by histologic type, 1980 to 2001. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14(4):1008–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Wells CJ, O’Donoghue C, Ojeda-Fournier H, Retallack HE, Esserman LJ. Evolving paradigm for imaging, diagnosis, and management of DCIS. J Am Coll Radiol JACR. 2013;10(12):918–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cady B, Chung MA. Preventing invasive breast cancer: another benefit from mammographic screening. Cancer. 2011;117(14):3064–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Pinsky RW, Rebner M, Pierce LJ, Ben-David MA, Vicini F, Hunt KA, et al. Recurrent cancer after breast-conserving surgery with radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic features, method of detection, and stage of recurrence. Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189(1):140–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tabár L, Vitak B, Hsiu-Hsi Chen T, Yen A, Cohen A, Tot T, Chiu S, Chen S, Fann J, Rosell J, Fohlin H, Smith R, Duffy S. Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. Radiology 2011 260:3, 658–663.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Med Inn Building, 48109, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Renee W. Pinsky MD

  2. Department of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Taubman Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, 48109, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

    Mark A. Helvie MD

Authors
  1. Renee W. Pinsky MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark A. Helvie MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Renee W. Pinsky MD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Lisa A. Newman

  2. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Jessica M. Bensenhaver

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Pinsky, R., Helvie, M. (2015). Role of Screening Mammography in Early Detection/Outcome of Breast Cancer. In: Newman, L., Bensenhaver, J. (eds) Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Microinvasive/Borderline Breast Cancer. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2035-8_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2035-8_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2034-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2035-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation