Screening for Cancer

  • Robert M. Kaplan

The American Cancer Society has promoted breast cancer screening through a number of celebrities, including Soraya, a Colombian Grammy Award winning singer and songwriter with great appeal in the Hispanic community. Soraya is a 36-year-old breast cancer survivor. She is also a spokeswoman for the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. In 2006, the ACS estimated that 212,920 women in the USA would be diagnosed with breast cancer. Furthermore, the society projected some 40,970 breast cancer deaths for 2006. Stunned by these data, Soraya decided to take a break from her music career to promote mammography, the American Cancer Society’s main weapon in the war against the disease.1 In the official view of the ACS, mammography is the essential tool for identifying cancer early so that it can be stopped in its tracks.

Yet, despite the broad appeal and acceptance of mammography and other cancer-screening tests, there is lingering concern about the scientific justification for their use. The...


Breast Cancer Rectal Cancer Cancer Screening American Cancer Society Screen Mammography 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ, Jr., Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States. JAMA. Jan 7 2004;291(1):71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aronowitz RA. Do not delay: breast cancer and time, 1900–1970. Milbank Q. 2001; 79(3):355–386, III.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eddy DM. The frequency of cervical cancer screening. Comparison of a mathematical model with empirical data. Cancer. Sep 1 1987;60(5):1117–1122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harris P, Carnes M. Is there an age at which we should stop performing screening pap smears and mammography? Cleve Clin J Med. Apr 2002;69(4):272–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parnes BL, Smith PC, Conry CM, Domke H. When should we stop mammography screening for breast cancer in elderly women? J Fam Pract. Feb 2001;50(2):110–111.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shapiro S, Coleman EA, Broeders M, et al. Breast cancer screening programmes in 22 countries: current policies, administration and guidelines. International Breast Cancer Screening Network (IBSN) and the European Network of Pilot Projects for Breast Cancer Screening. Int J Epidemiol. Oct 1998;27(5):735–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaplan RM. Shared medical decision making. A new tool for preventive medicine. Am J Prev Med. Jan 2004;26(1):81–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arnold K. Mammography guidelines in the national spotlight again. J Natl Cancer Inst. Mar 20 2002;94(6):411–413.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Screening for prostate cancer: commentary on the recommendations of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Am J Prev Med. Jul–Aug 1994;10(4):187–193.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levenson D. Routine prostate screening may be unnecessary and harmful. Rep Med Guidel Outcomes Res. Jan 10 2003;14(1):5–7.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Weston R, Parr N. New NHS guidelines for PSA testing in primary care. Lancet. Jan 4 2003;361(9351):89–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farhat WA, Habbal AA, Khauli RB. A guideline to clinical utility of prostate specific antigen. Saudi Med J. Mar 2000;21(3):223–227.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    New PSA guidelines for older men. Johns Hopkins Med Lett Health After 50. Sep 1998;10(7):1–2.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Duperray B, Junrod B. Depistage du cancer du sein. Medecine. 2006;2:364–367.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    American Cancer Society. California Division, California Cancer Registry. California cancer facts & figures. Oakland, CA: American Cancer Society California Division 2008.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Welch HG. Should I Be Tested for Cancer? Berkeley, CA: Universlty of California Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Black WC, Welch HG. Screening for disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. Jan 1997;168(1): 3–11.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Welch HG, Black WC. Evaluating randomized trials of screening. J Gen Intern Med. Feb 1997;12(2):118–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Black WC, Welch HG. Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N Engl J Med. Apr 29 1993;328(17):1237–1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE. The Swedish two county trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer: recent results and calculation of benefit. J Epidemiol Community Health. Jun 1989;43(2):107–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, et al. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. BMJ. Oct 15 1988;297(6654): 943–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bjurstam N, Bjorneld L, Duffy SW, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39–49 years at randomization. Cancer. Dec 1 1997;80(11):2091–2099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Roberts MM, Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, et al. Edinburgh trial of screening for breast cancer: mortality at seven years. Lancet. Feb 3 1990;335(8684):241–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miller AB, Baines CJ, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40–49 years. Cmaj. Nov 15 1992;147(10):1459–1476.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50–59 years. J Natl Cancer Inst. Sep 20 2000;92(18):1490–1499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mandel JS, Church TR, Ederer F, Bond JH. Colorectal cancer mortality: effectiveness of biennial screening for fecal occult blood. J Natl Cancer Inst. Mar 3 1999;91(5):434–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hardcastle JD, Chamberlain JO, Robinson MH, et al. Randomised controlled trial of faecal-occult-blood screening for colorectal cancer. Lancet. Nov 30 1996;348(9040): 1472–1477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kronborg O, Fenger C, Olsen J, Jorgensen OD, Sondergaard O. Randomised study of screening for colorectal cancer with faecal-occult-blood test. Lancet. Nov 30 1996; 348(9040):1467–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kubik A, Parkin DM, Khlat M, Erban J, Polak J, Adamec M. Lack of benefit from semi-annual screening for cancer of the lung: follow-up report of a randomized controlled trial on a population of high-risk males in Czechoslovakia. Int J Cancer. Jan 15 1990;45(1): 26–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marcus PM, Bergstralh EJ, Fagerstrom RM, et al. Lung cancer mortality in the Mayo Lung Project: impact of extended follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst. Aug 16 2000;92(16): 1308–1316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Black WC, Haggstrom DA, Welch HG. All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst. Feb 6 2002;94(3):167–173.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    de Koning HJ. Mammographic screening: evidence from randomised controlled trials. Ann Oncol. Aug 2003;14(8):1185–1189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barry MJ. Early detection and aggressive treatment of prostate cancer: groping in the dark. [Comment On: J Gen Intern Med. 2000 Oct;15(10):739–48]. J Gen Int Med. 2000;15(10):749–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Barry MJ. PSA screening for prostate cancer: the current controversy–a viewpoint. Patient Outcomes Research Team for Prostatic Diseases [see comments]. Ann Oncol. 1998;9(12):1279–1282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, United States. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Guide to clinical preventive services: report of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services Office of Public Health and Science Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion: Supt. of Docs. U.S. G.P.O. distributor; 1996.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Screening for prostate cancer. American College of Physicians [see comments]. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(6):480–484.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Physicians. AAoF. Summary of policy redommendations for periodic health examinations. 2000.
  38. 38.
    Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) best practice policy. American Urological Association (AUA). Oncology. 2000;14(2):267–272, 277–268, 280 passim.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Society AC. Prostate Cancer: Treatment Guidelines for Patients Version II. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2001.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    McLellan F. Independent US panel fans debate on mammography. Lancet. Feb 2 2002;359(9304):409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Miettinen OS, Henschke CI, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Libby DM, Yankelevitz DF. Mammographic screening: no reliable supporting evidence? Lancet. Feb 2 2002; 359(9304):404–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjold B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. Mar 16 2002;359(9310):909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gelmon KA, Olivotto I. The mammography screening debate: time to move on. Lancet. Mar 16 2002;359(9310):904–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Navarro AM, Kaplan RM. Mammography screening: prospects and opportunity costs. Womens Health. Winter 1996;2(4):209–233.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Barton MB, Moore S, Polk S, Shtatland E, Elmore JG, Fletcher SW. Increased patient concern after false-positive mammograms: clinician documentation and subsequent ambulatory visits. J Gen Intern Med. Mar 2001;16(3):150–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Fletcher SW. Whither scientific deliberation in health policy recommendations? Alice in the Wonderland of breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. Apr 17 1997;336(16): 1180–1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Olsen O, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet. Oct 20 2001;358(9290):1340–1342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Barratt A, Howard K, Irwig L, Salkeld G, Houssami N. Model of outcomes of screening mammography: information to support informed choices. BMJ. Apr 23 2005;330 (7497):936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Baines CJ. Mammography screening: are women really giving informed consent? J Natl Cancer Inst. Oct 15 2003;95(20):1508–1511.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zahl PH, Maehlen J. Model of outcomes of screening mammography: spontaneous regression of breast cancer may not be uncommon. BMJ. Aug 6 2005;331(7512):350; author reply 351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Zahl P, Mæhlen J, Welch H. The Natural History of Invasive Breast Cancers Detected by Screening Mammography. Arch Intern Med. Nov 24 2008.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Baum M, Demicheli R, Hrushesky W, Retsky M. Does surgery unfavourably perturb the “natural history” of early breast cancer by accelerating the appearance of distant metastases? Eur J Cancer. Mar 2005;41(4):508–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Gates TJ. Screening for cancer: evaluating the evidence. Am. Family Physician, 2001; 63(3):513–522.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Andersen LD, Remington PL, Trentham-Dietz A, Robert S. Community trends in the early detection of breast cancer in Wisconsin, 1980–1998. Am J Prev Med. Jan 2004;26(1): 51–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wennberg JE. The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care in the United States. Hanover, NH: Trustees of Dartmouth College; 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Kaplan
    • 1
  1. 1.UCLA School of Public HealthLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations