Topic
Breast self-examination
About: Breast self-examination is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2058 publications have been published within this topic receiving 50754 citations. The topic is also known as: Breast self exams.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) as a primary screening method for breast cancer.
Abstract: This guideline from the USPSTF is based on current evidence on mammography, digital breast tomography, and supplemental screening for breast cancer. The recommendations apply to asymptomatic women ...
1,383 citations
••
TL;DR: New studies and evidence gaps that were unresolved at the time of the 2002 USPSTF recommendation are focused on, including the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years and 70 years or older.
Abstract: To inform the USPSTF recommendations about breast cancer screening, Nelson and coworkers reviewed evidence on the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among ...
1,149 citations
••
TL;DR: The goal was to critically appraise and synthesize evidence about the overall effectiveness of breast cancer screening, as well as its effectiveness among women younger than 50 years of age, and to evaluate previous meta-analyses of these trials and of screening test characteristics and studies evaluating the harms associated with false-positive test results.
Abstract: Study Selection: Eight randomized, controlled trials of mammography and 2 trials evaluating breast self-examination were included. One hundred fifty-four publications of the results of these trials, as well as selected articles about the test characteristics and harms associated with screening, were examined. Data Extraction: Predefined criteria were used to assess the quality of each study. Meta-analyses using a Bayesian randomeffects model were conducted to provide summary relative risk estimates and credible intervals (CrIs) for the effectiveness of screening with mammography in reducing death from breast cancer. Data Synthesis: For studies of fair quality or better, the summary relative risk was 0.84 (95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.91) and the number needed to screen to prevent one death from breast cancer after approximately 14 years of observation was 1224 (CrI, 665 to 2564). Among women younger than 50 years of age, the summary relative risk associated with mammography was 0.85 (CrI, 0.73 to 0.99) and the number needed to screen to prevent one death from breast cancer after 14 years of observation was 1792 (CrI, 764 to 10 540). For clinical breast examination and breast self-examination, evidence from randomized trials is inconclusive. Conclusions: In the randomized, controlled trials, mammography reduced breast cancer mortality rates among women 40 to 74 years of age. Greater absolute risk reduction was seen among older women. Because these results incorporate several rounds of screening, the actual number of mammograms needed to prevent one death from breast cancer is higher. In addition, each screening has associated risks and costs.
1,117 citations
••
TL;DR: In the community, mammography remains the main screening tool while the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and self-examination are less, and new screening modalities are unlikely to replace mammography in the near future for screening the general population.
Abstract: ContextBreast cancer screening in community practices may be different from
that in randomized controlled trials. New screening modalities are becoming
available.ObjectivesTo review breast cancer screening, especially in the community and to
examine evidence about new screening modalities.Data Sources and Study SelectionEnglish-language articles of randomized controlled trials assessing
effectiveness of breast cancer screening were reviewed, as well as meta-analyses,
systematic reviews, studies of breast cancer screening in the community, and
guidelines. Also, studies of newer screening modalities were assessed.Data SynthesisAll major US medical organizations recommend screening mammography for
women aged 40 years and older. Screening mammography reduces breast cancer
mortality by about 20% to 35% in women aged 50 to 69 years and slightly less
in women aged 40 to 49 years at 14 years of follow-up. Approximately 95% of
women with abnormalities on screening mammograms do not have breast cancer
with variability based on such factors as age of the woman and assessment
category assigned by the radiologist. Studies comparing full-field digital
mammography to screen film have not shown statistically significant differences
in cancer detection while the impact on recall rates (percentage of screening
mammograms considered to have positive results) was unclear. One study suggested
that computer-aided detection increases cancer detection rates and recall
rates while a second larger study did not find any significant differences.
Screening clinical breast examination detects some cancers missed by mammography,
but the sensitivity reported in the community is lower (28% to 36%) than in
randomized trials (about 54%). Breast self-examination has not been shown
to be effective in reducing breast cancer mortality, but it does increase
the number of breast biopsies performed because of false-positives. Magnetic
resonance imaging and ultrasound are being studied for screening women at
high risk for breast cancer but are not recommended for screening the general
population. Sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging in high-risk women has
been found to be much higher than that of mammography but specificity is generally
lower. Effect of the magnetic resonance imaging on breast cancer mortality
is not known. A balanced discussion of possible benefits and harms of screening
should be undertaken with each woman.ConclusionsIn the community, mammography remains the main screening tool while
the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and self-examination are
less. New screening modalities are unlikely to replace mammography in the
near future for screening the general population.
990 citations
••
TL;DR: It is recommended that individuals considering genetic testing be counseled regarding the unknown efficacy of measures to reduce risk and that care for individuals with cancer-predisposing mutations be provided whenever possible within the context of research protocols designed to evaluate clinical outcomes.
Abstract: Objective. —To provide recommendations for cancer surveillance and risk reduction for individuals carrying mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes. Participants. —A task force with expertise in medical genetics, oncology, primary care, gastroenterology, and epidemiology convened by the Cancer Genetics Studies Consortium (CGSC), organized by National Human Genome Research Institute (previously the National Center for Human Genome Research). Evidence. —Studies evaluating cancer risk, surveillance, and risk reduction in individuals genetically susceptible to breast and ovarian cancer were identified using MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine) and from bibliographies of articles thus identified. Indexing terms used were "genetics" in combination with "breast cancer," "ovarian cancer," and "screening," or "surveillance" in combination with "cancer family" and " BRCA1 " and " BRCA2 ." For studies evaluating specific interventions, quality of evidence was assessed using criteria of the US Preventive Services Task Force. Consensus Process. —The task force developed recommendations through discussions over a 14-month period. Conclusions. —Efficacy of cancer surveillance or other measures to reduce risk in individuals who carry cancer-predisposing mutations is unknown. Based on expert opinion concerning presumptive benefit, early breast cancer and ovarian cancer screening are recommended for individuals with BRCA1 mutations and early breast cancer screening for those with BRCA2 mutations. No recommendation is made for or against prophylactic surgery (eg, mastectomy, oophorectomy); these surgeries are an option for mutation carriers, but evidence of benefit is lacking, and case reports have documented the occurrence of cancer following prophylactic surgery. It is recommended that individuals considering genetic testing be counseled regarding the unknown efficacy of measures to reduce risk and that care for individuals with cancer-predisposing mutations be provided whenever possible within the context of research protocols designed to evaluate clinical outcomes.
977 citations