This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (16)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letter  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Oncology  • Breast Cancer  • Radiologic Imaging  • Diagnosis  • Mammography  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Karen Antman, MD; Steven Shea, MD

JAMA. 1999;281:1470-1472.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

INTRODUCTION

Mammography is a screening procedure that has decreased the risk of death from breast cancer by 25% to 30%, as shown in 7 randomized studies (Table 1).^1-8 It can detect breast cancer or carcinoma in situ at 5 to 10 mm in diameter. Most physicians cannot reliably detect lesions smaller than 10 mm on physical examination, and patients generally seek medical attention for lesions that are 25 mm or larger.

Table appears in full text version. Table 1. Randomized Studies of Screening Mammography for Women Aged 40 to 49 Years*

Of women with known breast cancer who undergo mammography, 80% to 90% have a positive test result. A negative mammogram result does not preclude clinical breast cancer and should not dissuade physicians from biopsy of a palpable abnormality.

The remainder of this article discusses screening mammography only. No controversy exists over diagnostic mammography in any woman or man . . . [Full Text of this Article]

History of Recommendations

Why the Controversy?

A Reasonable Recommendation

Author Affiliations: Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center (Dr Antman) and the Division of General Medicine (Dr Shea), Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Screening Mammography for Women Younger Than 50 Years
Daniel B. Kopans, Karen Antman, and Steven Shea
JAMA. 1999;282(13):1225-1226.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

April 28, 1999
JAMA. 1999;281(16):1557-1558.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Diagnosis of Breast Cancer by Tear Proteomic Pattern
LEBRECHT et al.
Cancer Genomics Proteomics 2009;6:177-182.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Surface-enhanced Laser Desorption/Ionisation Time-of-flight Mass Spectrometry to Detect Breast Cancer Markers in Tears and Serum
LEBRECHT et al.
Cancer Genomics Proteomics 2009;6:75-83.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Determining use of preventive health care in Ontario: Comparison of rates of 3 maneuvers in administrative and survey data
Wang et al.
cfp 2009;55:178-179.e5.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Proteomics Analysis of Conditioned Media from Three Breast Cancer Cell Lines: A Mine for Biomarkers and Therapeutic Targets
Kulasingam and Diamandis
Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2007;6:1997-2011.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Identification of Biomarkers for Breast Cancer in Nipple Aspiration and Ductal Lavage Fluid
Li et al.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2005;11:8312-8320.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Independent Validation of Candidate Breast Cancer Serum Biomarkers Identified by Mass Spectrometry
Li et al.
Clin. Chem. 2005;51:2229-2235.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Proteomics and Bioinformatics Approaches for Identification of Serum Biomarkers to Detect Breast Cancer
Li et al.
Clin. Chem. 2002;48:1296-1304.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Communicating Genetic Risk: Pros, Cons, and Counsel
Penson et al.
The Oncologist 2000;5:152-161.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Age-related Accuracy of Screening Mammography: How Should It Be Measured?
Feig
Radiology 2000;214:633-640.
FULL TEXT  

Screening Mammography for Women Younger Than 50 Years
Kopans et al.
JAMA 1999;282:1225-1226.
FULL TEXT