Cost-Effectiveness of Mammography, MRI, and Ultrasonography for Breast Cancer Screening

被引:65
作者
Feig, Stephen [1 ]
机构
[1] UC Irvine Med Ctr, Dept Radiol Sci, Orange, CA 92868 USA
关键词
Breast cancer; MRI; Mammography; Ultrasound; COMPARING TOTAL MASTECTOMY; HIGH FAMILIAL RISK; 20-YEAR FOLLOW-UP; AGED; 40-49; YEARS; CORE BIOPSY; SOCIETY GUIDELINES; CLINICALLY OCCULT; MUTATION CARRIERS; FILM MAMMOGRAPHY; DENSE BREASTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.002
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Screening mammography performed annually on all women beginning at age 40 years has reduced breast cancer deaths by 30% to 50%. The cost per year of life saved is well within the range for other commonly accepted medical interventions. Various studies have estimated that reduction in treatment costs through early screening detection may be 30% to 100% or more of the cost of screening. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) screening is also cost-effective for very high-risk women, such as BRCA carriers, and others at 20% or greater lifetime risk. Further studies are needed to determine whether MRI is cost-effective for those at moderately high (15%-20%) lifetime risk. Future technical advances could make MRI more cost-effective than it is today. Automated whole-breast ultrasonography will probably prove cost-effective as a supplement to mammography for women with dense breasts.
引用
收藏
页码:879 / +
页数:14
相关论文
共 127 条
  • [1] Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme
    Amir, E
    Evans, DG
    Shenton, A
    Lalloo, F
    Moran, A
    Boggis, C
    Wilson, M
    Howell, A
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL GENETICS, 2003, 40 (11): : 807 - 814
  • [2] [Anonymous], 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H, DOI DOI 10.1093/OSO/9780195108248.001.0001
  • [3] [Anonymous], CANC PREV EARL DET F
  • [4] BASSETT LW, 1999, CLIN PRACTICE GUIDEL, P83
  • [5] BASSETT LW, 1994, AHCPR PUBLICATION, P83
  • [6] Familial breast cancer: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 52 epidemiological studies including 58 209 women with breast cancer and 101 986 women without the disease
    Beral, V
    Bull, D
    Doll, R
    Peto, R
    Reeves, G
    [J]. LANCET, 2001, 358 (9291) : 1389 - 1399
  • [7] Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer
    Berg, Wendie A.
    Blume, Jeffrey D.
    Cormack, Jean B.
    Mendelson, Ellen B.
    Lehrer, Daniel
    Bohm-Velez, Marcela
    Pisano, Etta D.
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Evans, W. Phil
    Morton, Marilyn J.
    Mahoney, Mary C.
    Larsen, Linda Hovanessian
    Barr, Richard G.
    Farria, Dione M.
    Marques, Helga S.
    Boparai, Karan
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2008, 299 (18): : 2151 - 2163
  • [8] Tailored Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer: What Now and What Next?
    Berg, Wendie A.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2009, 192 (02) : 390 - 399
  • [9] Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis
    Bevers, Therese B.
    Anderson, Benjamin O.
    Bonaccio, Ermelinda
    Buys, Sandra
    Daly, Mary B.
    Dempsey, Peter J.
    Farrar, William B.
    Fleming, Irving
    Garber, Judy E.
    Harris, Randall E.
    Heerdt, Alexandra S.
    Helvie, Mark
    Huff, John G.
    Khakpour, Nazanin
    Khan, Seema A.
    Krontiras, Helen
    Lyman, Gary
    Rafferty, Elizabeth
    Shaw, Sara
    Smith, Mary Lou
    Tsangaris, Theodore N.
    Williams, Cheryl
    Yaneeklov, Thomas
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL COMPREHENSIVE CANCER NETWORK, 2009, 7 (10): : 1060 - 1096
  • [10] Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer
    Boyd, Norman F.
    Guo, Helen
    Martin, Lisa J.
    Sun, Limei
    Stone, Jennifer
    Fishell, Eve
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Hislop, Greg
    Chiarelli, Anna
    Minkin, Salomon
    Yaffe, Martin J.
    [J]. NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2007, 356 (03) : 227 - 236