Screening Mammography for Younger Women: Back to Basics
Authors: Harold Sox
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2002)

Editorials3 September 2002Screening Mammography for Younger Women: Back to BasicsHarold Sox, MD, EditorHarold Sox, MD, EditorSearch for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-137-5_Part_1-200209030-00014 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail This issue of Annals adds fuel to the breast cancer screening debate. It contains the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's recommendations on breast cancer screening, a summary of the supporting evidence, an editorial about dealing responsibly with conflicting evidence, and a report from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (CNBSS). The CNBSS randomly assigned 50 304 women age 40 to 49 years to receive mammography and breast examinations five times annually or to receive usual care. The article in this issue by Miller and colleagues (1), the third report from this trial, uses data on breast cancer mortality 11 to ...References1. Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up. A randomized screening trial of mammography in women age 40 to 49 years. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:305-12. LinkGoogle Scholar2. Goodman SN. The mammography dilemma: a crisis for evidence-based medicine? [Editorial]. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:363-5. LinkGoogle Scholar3. Nyström L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Frisell J, Nordenskjöld B, Rutqvist LE. Long-term effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet. 2002;359:909-19. [PMID: 11918907] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Gøtzsche PC, Olsen O. Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet. 2000;355:129-34. [PMID: 10675181] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Olsen O, Gøtzsche PC. Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography [Letter]. Lancet. 2001;358:1340-42. [PMID: 11684218] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6. Olsen O, Gøtzsche PC. Systematic review of screening for breast cancer with mammography. Accessed at image.thelancet.com/lancet/extra/fullreport.pdf on 23 July 2002. Google Scholar7. Miettinen OS, Henschke CI, Pasmantier MW, Smith JP, Libby DM, Yankelevitz DF. Mammographic screening: no reliable supporting evidence? [Letter]. Lancet. 2002;359:404-5. [PMID: 11844515] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Berry DA. Benefits and risks of screening mammography for women in their forties: a statistical appraisal. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90:1431-9. [PMID: 9776408] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:347-60. LinkGoogle Scholar10. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000;320:1635-40. [PMID: 10856064] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Corresponding Author: Customer Service, American College of Physicians–American Society of Internal Medicine, 190 N. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoThe Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: Breast Cancer Mortality after 11 to 16 Years of Follow-up: A Randomized Screening Trial of Mammography in Women Age 40 to 49 Years Anthony B. Miller , Teresa To , Cornelia J. Baines , and Claus Wall Screening for Breast Cancer: Recommendations and RationaleBreast Cancer Screening: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Linda L. Humphrey , Mark Helfand , Benjamin K.S. Chan , and Steven H. Woolf The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: Breast Cancer Mortality after 11 to 16 Years of Follow-up: A Randomized Screening Trial of Mammography in Women Age 40 to 49 Years Anthony B. Miller , Teresa To , Cornelia J. Baines , and Claus Wall Breast Cancer Screening: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Linda L. Humphrey , Mark Helfand , Benjamin K.S. Chan , and Steven H. Woolf Screening for Breast Cancer: Recommendations and RationaleBreast Cancer Screening Daniel B. Kopans Breast Cancer Screening Harold C. Sox Metrics Cited byMonocyte-derived macrophage assisted breast cancer cell invasion as a personalized, predictive metric to score metastatic riskThe role of evidence-based medicine and clinical trials in rare genetic disordersBreast Cancer Screening: Implications and Clinical PerspectivesEvidence in Medicine and Evidence-Based MedicineUse of Modeling to Evaluate the Cost-Effectiveness of Cancer Screening ProgramsScreening for Breast CancerCost-effectiveness Analysis in the Assessment of Diagnostic Imaging TechnologiesCriticisms of Evidence–Based MedicineA categorization and analysis of the criticisms of Evidence-Based MedicineGauging the impact of breast carcinoma screening in terms of tumor size and death rateBreast Cancer, Mammography, and Malpractice Litigation: The Controversies ContinueBreast Cancer ScreeningDaniel B. Kopans, MDBreast cancer screening: controversies and future directionsScreening for lung cancer: in pursuit of pre-metastatic disease 3 September 2002Volume 137, Issue 5_Part_1Page: 361-362KeywordsBreast cancerBreast cancer screeningCancer screeningConfidence intervalsDeath ratesForecastingLymph nodesMammographyMortalityRelative risk ePublished: 3 September 2002 Issue Published: 3 September 2002 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2002 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...