Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Maturitas. 2014 Dec;79(4):481-6. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.09.002. Epub 2014 Sep 16.

EMAS position statement: individualized breast cancer screening versus population-based mammography screening programmes.

Author information

1
Breast Clinic and Menopause Clinic, University Hospital, De Pintelaan 185, 9000 Gent, Belgium. Electronic address: Herman.depypere@ugent.be.
2
CHR de la CITADELLE - Boulevard du 12ème de Ligne, 1 à 4000 Liège, Belgium.
3
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Zaragoza University Faculty of Medicine, Lozano Blesa University Hospital, Domingo Miral s/n, Zaragoza 50009, Spain.
4
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Carol Davila' University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest, Romania; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 'Dr. I. Cantacuzino' Hospital, Bucharest, Romania.
5
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul University, Cerrahpasa School of Medicine, Valikonagi Cad. No: 93/4, Nisantasi, 34365 Istanbul, Turkey.
6
Second Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, National and Capodestrian University of Athens, Greece.
7
Department of Medicine, Cardiology Unit and Head Centre for Gender Medicine, Karolinska Institutet and Karolinska University Hospital, Thorax N3:06, SE 17176 Stockholm, Sweden.
8
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
9
Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Via Roma, 67, 56100 Pisa, Italy.
10
Menopause and Metabolic Bone Disease Unit, Hôpital Paule de Viguier, F-31059 Toulouse cedex 09, France.
11
Women's Centre, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 9DU, UK.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women, with slightly more than ten percent developing the disease in Western countries. Mammography screening is a well established method to detect breast cancer.

AIMS:

The aim of the position statement is to review critically the advantages and shortcomings of population based mammography screening.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

Literature review and consensus of expert opinion.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:

Mammography screening programmes vary worldwide. Thus there are differences in the age at which screening is started and stopped and in the screening interval. Furthermore differences in screening quality (such as equipment, technique, resolution, single or double reading, recall rates) result in a sensitivity varying from 70% to 94% between studies. Reporting results of screening is subject to different types of bias such as overdiagnosis. Thus because of the limitations of population-based mammography screening programmes an algorithm for individualized screening is proposed.

KEYWORDS:

Breast cancer; Individualized; Mammography screening

PMID:
25277123
DOI:
10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.09.002
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center