Washington – In Reversal, US Urges Mammograms at 50, Not 40

    31

    Washington – Most women should wait until age 50 to get mammograms and then have one every two years, a government task force said Monday in a major reversal that conflicts with the American Cancer Society’s long-standing recommendation of annual screening starting at 40.

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    Also, the task force said breast self-exams do no good and women shouldn’t be taught to do them.

    For nearly two decades, the cancer society has been recommending regular mammograms beginning at 40.

    But the government panel of doctors and scientists concluded that getting screened for breast cancer so early and so often is harmful, causing too many false alarms and unneeded biopsies without substantially improving women’s odds of surviving the disease.

    “The benefits are less and the harms are greater when screening starts in the 40s,” said Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chair of the panel.

    The new guidelines were issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, whose stance influences coverage of screening tests by Medicare and many insurance companies. But Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, an industry group, said insurance coverage isn’t likely to change because of the new guidelines.

    Experts expect the revisions to be hotly debated, and to cause confusion for women and their doctors.

    “Our concern is that as a result of that confusion, women may elect not to get screened at all. And that, to me, would be a serious problem,” said Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, the cancer society’s deputy chief medical officer.

    The guidelines are for the general population, not those at high risk of breast cancer because of family history or gene mutations that would justify having mammograms sooner or more often.

    The new advice says:

    _Most women in their 40s should not routinely get mammograms.

    _Women 50 to 74 should get a mammogram every other year until they turn 75, after which the risks and benefits are unknown. (The task force’s previous guidelines had no upper limit and called for exams every year or two.)

    _The value of breast exams by doctors is unknown. And breast self-exams are of no value.

    Medical groups such as the cancer society have been backing off promoting breast self-exams in recent years because of scant evidence of their effectiveness. Decades ago, the practice was so heavily promoted that organizations distributed cards that could be hung in the shower demonstrating the circular motion women should use to feel for lumps in their breasts.

    The guidelines and research supporting them were released Monday and are being published in Tuesday’s issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine.

    The new advice was sharply challenged by the cancer society.

    “This is one screening test I recommend unequivocally, and would recommend to any woman 40 and over,” the society’s chief medical officer, Dr. Otis Brawley, said in a statement.

    The task force advice is based on its conclusion that screening 1,300 women in their 50s to save one life is worth it, but that screening 1,900 women in their 40s to save a life is not, Brawley wrote.

    That stance “is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives, just not enough of them,” he said. The cancer society feels the benefits outweigh the harms for women in both groups.

    International guidelines also call for screening to start at age 50; the World Health Organization recommends the test every two years, Britain says every three years.

    Breast cancer is the most common cancer and the second leading cause of cancer deaths in American women. More than 192,000 new cases and 40,000 deaths from the disease are expected in the U.S. this year.

    Mammograms can find cancer early, and two-thirds of women over 40 report having had the test in the previous two years. But how much they cut the risk of dying of the disease, and at what cost in terms of unneeded biopsies, expense and worry, have been debated.

    In most women, tumors are slow-growing, and that likelihood increases with age. So there is little risk by extending the time between mammograms, some researchers say. Even for the minority of women with aggressive, fast-growing tumors, annual screening will make little difference in survival odds.

    The new guidelines balance these risks and benefits, scientists say.

    The probability of dying of breast cancer after age 40 is 3 percent, they calculate. Getting a mammogram every other year from ages 50 to 69 lowers that risk by about 16 percent.

    “It’s an average of five lives saved per thousand women screened,” said Georgetown University researcher Dr. Jeanne Mandelblatt.

    Starting at age 40 would prevent one additional death but also lead to 470 false alarms for every 1,000 women screened. Continuing mammograms through age 79 prevents three additional deaths but raises the number of women treated for breast cancers that would not threaten their lives.

    “You save more lives because breast cancer is more common, but you diagnose tumors in women who were destined to die of something else. The overdiagnosis increases in older women,” Mandelblatt said.

    She led six teams around the world who used federal data on cancer and mammography to develop mathematical models of what would happen if women were screened at different ages and time intervals. Their conclusions helped shape the new guidelines.

    Several medical groups say they are sticking to their guidelines that call for routine screening starting at 40.

    “Screening isn’t perfect. But it’s the best thing we have. And it works,” said Dr. Carol Lee, a spokeswoman for the American College of Radiology. She suggested that cutting health care costs may have played a role in the decision, but Petitti said the task force does not consider cost or insurance in its review.

    The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also has qualms. The organization’s Dr. Hal Lawrence said there is still significant benefit to women in their 40s, adding: “We think that women deserve that benefit.”

    But Dr. Amy Abernethy of the Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center agreed with the task force’s changes.

    “Overall, I think it really took courage for them to do this,” she said. “It does ask us as doctors to change what we do and how we communicate with patients. That’s no small undertaking.”

    Abernethy, who is 41, said she got her first mammogram the day after her 40th birthday, even though she wasn’t convinced it was needed. Now she doesn’t plan to have another mammogram until she is 50.

    Barbara Brenner, executive director of the San Francisco-based Breast Cancer Action, said the group was “thrilled” with the revisions. The advocacy group doesn’t support screening before menopause, and will be changing its suggested interval from yearly to every two years, she said.

    Mammograms, like all medical interventions, have risks and benefits, she said.

    “Women are entitled to know what they are and to make their best decisions,” she said. “These guidelines will help that conversation.”


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    31 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    It sounds like the new guidelines will be “Cost Effective” and not necessarily “Health Effective.”

    anonymous
    anonymous
    14 years ago

    Number 1 you are right. I like to have the number of women in their thrties and forties who had positive mammographies and needed mastectomies or lumpectomies. Especially if the mother had breast cancer. Breast cancer undergooes staging from T 1 to T 4. It is easier and more promising to treat a T 1 tumor than a T 4. By the time a person feels the tumor many times it is too late and more radical procedures are necessary. Microcalfications maybe a sign of malignancy and they only can be diagnosed through mammography. This is as # 1 “cost effective” medicine and as a British physician said survival of fitters. I hope an oncologist has time and can put it his two cents

    anonymous
    anonymous
    14 years ago

    Staging of breast cancer is T for tumor, N for lymphatic node, M for metastases but there is another grading and that is G which defines the aggressivity through histology of a particular malignancy. Those who made the changes are not women, and they determine like the triage system of course not for their mother, sister or daughter only for yenem. This is compassion ?

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    Something doesn’t sit right about this whole thing.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    Let Obamacare rationing begin!!!!

    Bubbie
    Bubbie
    14 years ago

    The report does not estimate how many women may have developed cancer as a result of the radiation they were exposed to. Charlie Hall, can you tell us anything about that?

    Charlie Hall
    Charlie Hall
    14 years ago

    It should be noted that this is not a polticial body making this reccommendation but a nonpolitical panel of experts. Neither President Obama nor any of his political appointees had anything to do with this; in fact they probably didn’t even know that this was going to happen.

    anonymous
    anonymous
    14 years ago

    I am not a professor but worked in the medical field for more than 40 years. If a lesion [malignant] is detected before a tumor has formed the chances are better to achieve a ” remission” maybe not cure than when the patient has detected the tumor. Of course the staging reveals and the G marker is most revealing. Another statement which is not completely true is that biopsies are deforming. Needle biopsies are not.

    A Jewish mother
    A Jewish mother
    14 years ago

    Breast cancer has increased 300% since mammograms. Mammograms CAUSE breast cancer.
    Dr. Irwin Bross,director of biostatistics at Roswell Park Memorial Institute in Buffalo, New York studied the alarming increase in rates of leukemia using tumor registries from 16 million people. Dr. Bross came to the conclusion that the main cause of the rising rates of leukemia was medical radiation in the form of diagnostic medical X-rays (Leslie Freeman, ed., Nuclear Witnesses: Insiders Speak Out, New York: Norton, 1982, p. 27).Dr. John Gofman, Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California research led him to write a 400-page book in which he estimates that “three-quarters of the current annual incidence of breast cancer in the United States is being caused by earlier ionizing radiation, primarily from medical sources.”

    Gofman continues, “has known for 20 years that ionizing radiation is a prominent and proven cause of breast-cancer” (John Gofman, Preventing Breast Cancer, San Francisco: Committee for Nuclear Responsibility, 1995, p. 303)

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    The theory is very vague. Unfortunately, we are told to do colonoscopy after 50. When a friend of mine wanted to do it at 45 her doctor discouraged her. Unfortunatley, she should have not listened. She was niftar at a young age leaving her husband with 7 children still at home. Yes, there is a theory that even when finding a lump, not to jump to radical treatment or surgery. Sometimes they do disappear….but what if they don’t?
    Who is this person making medical decision for all? Are those in healthcare going to be rewarded more vacations and bonuses while our premiums are raised, our copays go up and in return will be told you are too young or too old!!

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    What a terrible decree by these “experts” issued only to squeeze money from the system and make hospice non-treatment the norm for costly diseases.

    Daven for all Bnai Yisrael afflicted with the machalah !!! My sister in law is in the hospital with a thread of hope due to lymphoma. Rounds of chemo and radiation have done nothing to stop it. There is only hope remaining. Please daven for all cholim !!! HaShem Yirachem Aleinu…

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    I’m in an at-risk category – mother, grandmother, several great-aunts all had breast cancer, so when my doctor told me to start getting mammos at 35, I did. And I’m glad I did because when cancer was detected when I was 46, it was very small, and my treatment was not as devastating as it would have been had the tumor been larger. As long as doctors can convince the insurance companies and the screening centers that the screenings are medically necessary, then there isn’t any problem. But, if these 2 groups determine that they aren’t necessary for anyone under 50, then how many women will lose their breasts & possibly the use of an arm (they remove lymph nodes under the arm) because they “waited too long”?

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    I have yet to see recommendations for true prevention in the form of exercise, wholesome foods, excellent quality drinking water and supplements. But of course, since there is no money in that, I don’t expect to.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    why don’t insurance companies cover breast MRI’S ?especially for those at risk!

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    This is going to hurt the publichealth care debate , this report came out at the wrong time (I’m not saying obama’s fault) but never the less its going to put social healthcare in its coffin

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    Just wondering – has anyone read this portion of the article:

    “The guidelines are for the general population, not those at high risk of breast cancer because of family history or gene mutations that would justify having mammograms sooner or more often”

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    The beginning of RATIONED health care. People better start calling their senators to block this bill, before its to late. This is only the beginning.

    Anonymous
    Anonymous
    14 years ago

    federal health owned/run has not even been finalized nor voted on and already the rationing has begun…first they are getting rid of seniors by cutting medicare by $500 BILLION dollars and now they are getting rid of women by telling them (the government not their doctor) not to start mammograms until they are 50 rather than 40 and only every other year!

    what do you think those MALE SENATORS AND REPS are going to say when some government “task force” not their doctor tells them not to check for cancer more than every five years….OH THAT’S RIGHT! THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE SAME GOVERNMENT OWNED/RUN HEALTH CARE THEY ARE JAMMING DOWN OUR THROATS…THOSE SENATORS AND REPS, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AND UNION MEMBERS ALL HAVE GOOD, PRIVATE SECTOR HEALTH INSURANCE!