Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis pp 23–36Cite as

Screening for Breast Cancer

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 3439 Accesses

Abstract

Screening is defined as the presumptive identification of unrecognized disease by means of tests, examinations, or other procedures that can be applied rapidly. The World Health Organization outlines a number of important prerequisites to justify implementation of an effective screening program: Target cancer should have a high prevalence and be associated with a high mortality and morbidity; the screening test has to be safe, effective, and acceptable; the compliance of the target population in attending initial screening and diagnosis and in follow-up visits has to be high; effective treatment should be available to be delivered to screen positive cases; an ideal screening test is one which detects a high percentage of cancers [sensitivity] and has low false-positive rate so that disease-free women are not subjected to unnecessary diagnostic tests. A high prevalence of cancer in the target population being screened is an important prerequisite since even the best screening test will be ineffective when deployed in a population with a low prevalence of cancer. National and/or professional or regulatory body guidelines in individual countries for cancer screening should be based on cancer incidence and prevalence statistics. These need to address at what age and how frequent screening needs to be performed; additional influencing factors to be taken into consideration will also include cost-effectiveness of screening strategy. Quality control and assurance to ensure effectiveness, accuracy, and consistency has to be applied to and monitored for health-care personnel performing and interpreting these tests as well as for the equipment used for this purpose. A tested and a robust referral system for women testing positive for cancers needs to be in place. An information system that can send out invitations for initial screening, follow-up visits, and repeat screening at predetermined intervals is a must to ensure success.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. World Health Organization. Screening for various cancers. http://www.who.int/cancer/detection/variouscancer/en/index.html.

  2. Fletcher SW, Elmore JG. Clinical practice: mammographic screening for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1672–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Tabár L, Fagerberg CJG, Gad A, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: randomized trial from the breast cancer screening working group of the Swedish national board of health and welfare. Lancet. 1985;1:829–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, et al. Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results from the Swedish two county trials. Cancer. 1995;75:2507–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen H-H, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomized controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality. Cancer. 2001;91(9):1724–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of mammography. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:168–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Perry N, Broeders M, Wolf CD, Tornberg S, Holland R, Karsa LV. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Fourth edition-summary document. Ann Oncol. 2008;19:614–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, Evans P, Monsees B, Monticello D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the society of breast imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol. 2010;7:18–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening for breast cancer. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1245–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:347–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Medical Advisory secretariat. Screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2007;7(1):1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Larsson LG, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Fagerberg G, Frisell J, Tabár L, Nyström L. Updated overview of the Swedish randomized trials on breast cancer screening with mammography: age group 40–49 at randomization. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997;22:57–61.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Malmgren J, Parikh JA, Atwood MK, Kaplan HJ. Impact of mammography detection on the course of breast cancer in women aged 40–49 years. Radiology. 2012;262(3):797–806.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Eaton A, Ernster V. Positive predictive value of screening mammography by age and family history of breast cancer. JAMA. 1993;270(20):2444–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. The benefits and harms of mammography screening. Understanding the trade-offs. JAMA. 2010;303(2):164–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Berg WA. Benefits of screening mammography. JAMA. 2010;303(2):168–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Geller BM, Bogart A, Carney PA, Elmore JG, Monsees BS, Miglioretti DL. Is confidence of mammographic assessment a good predictor of accuracy? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199(1):W134–41.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer. 2013;108(11):2205–40.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(21):1998–2005.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gøtzsche PC, Jørgensen KJ. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(6):CD001877.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kuhl CK. The “coming of age” of nonmammographic screening for breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299:2203–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women with elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299:2151–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Nothacker M, Duda V, Hahn M, et al. Early detection of breast cancer: benefits and risks of supplemental breast ultrasound in asymptomatic women with mammographically dense breast tissue: a systematic review. BMC Cancer. 2009;9:1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Le-Petross HT, Shetty MK. Magnetic resonance imaging and breast ultrasonography as an adjunct to mammographic screening in high-risk patients. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2011;32(4):266–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Berg WA. Beyond standard mammographic screening: mammography at age extremes, ultrasound, and MR imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2007;45:895–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gordan PB. Ultrasound for breast cancer screening and staging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2002;40:431–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:227–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Berg WA. Supplemental screening sonography in dense breasts. Radiol Clin North Am. 2004;42:845–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Tohno E, Ueno E, Watanabe H. Ultrasound screening of breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2009;16:18–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tunoda H, Tohno E, Ueno E, et al. Examination of effectiveness of breast cancer detection by modalities and age groups. J Jpn Ass Breast Cancer Screen. 1998;7:281–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Osako T, Takahashi K, Iwase T, et al. Diagnostic ultrasonography and mammography for invasive and noninvasive breast cancer in women aged 30 to 39 years. Breast Cancer. 2007;14:229–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Corsetti V, Ferrari A, Ghirardi M, et al. Role of ultrasonography in detecting mammographically occult breast carcinoma in women with dense breasts. Radiol Med (Torino). 2006;111:440–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Menell JH, Morris EA, Dershaw DD, et al. Determination of the presence and extent of pure ductal carcinoma in situ by mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J. 2005;11:382–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hooley RJ, et al. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09–41. Radiology. 2012;265(1):59–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The Connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2012;18(6):517–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Corsetti V. Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer. 2011;47(7):1021–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gartlehner G, et al. Adjunct ultrasonography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk: a systematic review. Int J Evid Based Health. 2013;11(2):87–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Gartlehner G. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;(4):CD009632.

    Google Scholar 

  39. D’Orsi CJ, Newell MS. On the frontline of screening for breast cancer. Semin Oncol. 2011;38(1):119–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Meissner HI, Breen N, Yabroff KR. Whatever happened to clinical breast examination. Am J Prev Med. 2003;25(3):259–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Weiss NS. Breast cancer mortality in relation to clinical breast examination and breast self examination. Breast J. 2003;9 suppl 2:S86–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Barton MB, Harris R, Fletcher SW. Does this patient have breast cancer? The screening clinical breast examination: should it be done? How? JAMA. 1999;282:1270–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. 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. Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:1490–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Okonkwo QL, Draisma G, Kinderen AD, et al. Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost effectiveness analysis for India. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1290–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Kearney AJ, Murray M. Breast cancer screening recommendations: is mammography the only answer? J Midwifery Womens Health. 2009;54:393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Thomas DB, Gao DL, Ray RM, et al. Randomized trial of breast self-examination in Shanghai: final results. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1445–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Gastrin G, et al. Incidence and mortality from breast cancer in the Mama program for breast screening in Finland, 1973–1986. Cancer. 1994;73:2168–74, c J. 157, 1205–1212.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Semiglazov VF, et al. Study of the role of breast self-examination in the reduction of mortality from breast cancer. Eur J Cancer. 1993;29A:2039–46.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. O’Malley MS, Fletcher SW, US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer with breast self-examination: a critical review. JAMA. 1987;257:2196–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Miller AB, Bianes CJ. The role of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination. Prev Med. 2011;53:118–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Harvey BJ, et al. Effect of breast self-examination techniques on the risk of death from breast cancer. Can Med Assoc. 1997;157(9):1205–12.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Hendrick RE. Helvie mammography screening: a new estimate of number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death. AJR. 2012;198:723–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. 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;51:81–91.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, et al. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years’ follow-up: a randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2006;368:2053–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Hendrick RE. Mammography screening: a new estimate of number needed to screen to prevent one breast cancer death. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(3):723–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Smith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K, Gebretsadik T. Is screening mammography effective in elderly women? Am J Med. 2000;108:112–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Mandelblatt J, et al. Which strategies reduce breast cancer mortality most? Collaborative modeling of optimal screening, treatment, and obesity prevention. Cancer. 2013;119(14):2541–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  58. Webb ML, Cady B, Michaelson JS, Bush DM, Calvillo KZ, Kopans DB, Smith BL. A failure analysis of invasive breast cancer. Cancer. 2013. doi:10.1002/cncr.28199 [Epub ahead of print].

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM

  2. Woman’s Center for Breast Care and MRI, Woman’s Hospital of Texas, Fannin 7600, Houston, TX, 77054, USA

    Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM

Authors
  1. Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahesh K. Shetty MD, FRCR, FACR, FAIUM .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Woman's Hospital of TexasWomen's Department of Radiology,, Baylor College of Medicine, Centre for Breast Care and MRI., Houston, Texas, USA

    Mahesh K Shetty

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shetty, M.K. (2015). Screening for Breast Cancer. In: Shetty, M. (eds) Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1267-4_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1267-4_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1266-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1267-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation