prior mammogram
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

3
(FIVE YEARS 1)

H-INDEX

2
(FIVE YEARS 1)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew M Miller ◽  
Kathy Repich ◽  
James T Patrie ◽  
Roger T Anderson ◽  
Jennifer A Harvey

Abstract Objective New breast screening modalities are being investigated to address the need for more sensitive breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts. We investigated the preferences and attitudes of these patients regarding adjunct screening modalities to help evaluate the acceptability of these exams. Methods In this institutional review board–approved prospective study, patients with dense breasts on their prior mammogram were invited to complete a survey. Patients were asked to estimate their personal breast cancer risk compared with peers, indicate their level of concern related to screening callbacks, radiation exposure, and intravenous (IV) contrast allergies, and identify which factors might deter them from getting adjunct screening exams. Results Five hundred eight patients with dense breasts presenting for screening mammography completed surveys. While most patients (304/508, 59.9%) felt it was likely or very likely that cancer could be missed on their mammogram, only 8.9% (45/508) had undergone adjunct screening exams in the past 3 years. The most commonly cited deterrents to adjunct screening were cost (340/508, 66.9%), pain (173/508, 34.1%), and concern that adjunct screening could lead to additional procedures (158/508, 31.1%). When asked to select among three hypothetical breast cancer screening modalities, patients strongly preferred the more sensitive examination, even if this involved greater cost (162/508, 31.9%) or IV-contrast administration (315/508, 62.0%). Conclusion Our data suggest that patients with dense breasts prefer adjunct screening exams that are both sensitive and inexpensive, although an increase in sensitivity could outweigh additional cost or even IV-line placement.


2016 ◽  
Vol 58 (2) ◽  
pp. 148-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Won Hwa Kim ◽  
Jung Min Chang ◽  
Hye Ryoung Koo ◽  
Mirinae Seo ◽  
Min Sun Bae ◽  
...  

Background Although digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is an emerging technique yielding higher sensitivity and specificity compared to digital mammography (DM) alone, relative contribution of prior mammograms on the interpretation of DBT combined with DM has not been investigated. Purpose To retrospectively compare the diagnostic performances of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms. Material and Methods Three breast radiologists independently reviewed images of 116 patients with 24 cancers in the sequential order of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment categories. Results The average areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms were 0.712, 0.777, and 0.816, respectively. Adding prior mammograms did not significantly affect the AUC of DM + DBT ( P = 0.108), whereas adding DBT significantly increased the AUC of DM ( P = 0.009). Sensitivity for DM, DM + DBT, and DM + DBT with prior mammograms was 58.3%, 69.4%, and 69.4%, and specificities were 84.1%, 85.9%, and 93.8%, respectively. Addition of DBT significantly increased the sensitivity ( P = 0.0090) of DM. Prior mammograms significantly improved the specificity of DM + DBT ( P = 0.0004), whereas adding prior mammogram did not affect sensitivity of DM + DBT ( P = 1.000). Conclusion DBT significantly increases the overall sensitivity and diagnostic performance of DM. Prior mammograms significantly increase the specificity of DM + DBT but have no significant effect on sensitivity and overall diagnostic performance.


1999 ◽  
Vol 85 (2) ◽  
pp. 405-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet Kay Bobo ◽  
Denita Dean ◽  
Christina Stovall ◽  
Margaret Mendez ◽  
Lee Caplan

Age-eligible women enrolled in the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program can obtain free or low-cost mammograms annually, but many do not routinely complete rescreening. This study investigated the rescreening behavior of low-income women by conducting 8 focus groups in Texas with enrollees who had access to free mammograms. Concerns mentioned in the focus groups included fear of radiation, anxiety that the test might not find a cancer that was there, and worries that cancer might be detected. In all groups, some women mentioned the embarrassment, discomfort, or pain they experienced during a prior mammogram, although no one indicated they would refuse to have another mammogram because of these concerns. Findings highlight the useful insights that can be obtained from focus groups and underscore the need for more research on aspects of the experience of mammography that may affect rescreening.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document