Current Bibliographies in Medicine 96-5

Breast Cancer Screening in Women Ages 40-49

January 1985 through November 1996

334 Selected Citations

Prepared by
Jennie P. Hunt, M.L.S., National Library of Medicine
John K. Gohagan, Ph.D., F.A.C.E., National Cancer Institute

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
National Institutes of Health

National Library of Medicine
Reference Section
8600 Rockville Pike
Bethesda, Maryland 20894

1996

National Library of Medicine Cataloging in Publication

Hunt, Jennie P.
Breast cancer screening in women ages 40-49: January 1985 through November 1996 : 334 selected citations / prepared by Jennie P. Hunt, John K. Gohagan. -- Bethesda, Md. (8600 Rockville Pike, Bethesda 20894) : U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine, Reference Section ; Pittsburgh, PA : Sold by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O., 1996.
-- (Current bibliographies in medicine ; 96-5)

Prepared in support of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on Breast Cancer Screening in Women Ages 40-49, held in Bethesda, Md., January 21-23, 1997.

1. Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology - bibliography 2. Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology - bibliography 3. Breast Neoplasms - mortality - bibliography 4. Mammography - bibliography 5. Mass Screening - bibliography I. Gohagan, John Kenneth. II. National Library of Medicine (U.S.). Reference Section III. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on Breast Cancer Screening in Women Ages 40-49 (1997 : Bethesda, Md.) IV. Title V. Series

02NLM: ZW 1 N272 no.96-5

Series Note

Current Bibliographies in Medicine (CBM) is a continuation in part of the National Library of Medicine's Literature Search Series, which ceased in 1987 with No. 87-15. In 1989 it also subsumed the Specialized Bibliography Series. Each bibliography in the new series covers a distinct subject area of biomedicine and is intended to fulfill a current awareness function. Citations are usually derived from searching a variety of online databases. Citations are usually derived from searching a variety of online databases. NLM databases utilized include MEDLINE®, AVLINE®, BIOETHICSLINE®, CANCERLIT®, CATLINE®, HEALTHSTAR^tm, POPLINE^tm and TOXLINE®. The only criterion for the inclusion of a particular published work is its relevance to the topic being presented; the format, ownership, or location of the material is not considered.

Comments and suggestions on this series may be addressed to:

Karen Patrias, Editor
Current Bibliographies in Medicine
Reference Section
National Library of Medicine
Bethesda, MD 20894
Phone: 301-496-6097
Fax: 301-402-1384
ref@nlm.nih.gov

Ordering Information:

Current Bibliographies in Medicine is sold by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-7954. To order the entire CBM series for calendar year 1996 (approximately 10 bibliographies), send $47.00 ($58.75 foreign) to the Superintendent of Documents citing GPO List ID: CBM96. Orders for individual bibliographies in the series ($5.50, $6.88 foreign) should be sent to the Superintendent of Documents citing the title, CBM number, and the GPO List ID number.

Internet Access:

The Current Bibliographies in Medicine series is also available at no cost to anyone with Internet access through the Library's World Wide Web site at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/pubs/resources.html.

Use of funds for printing this periodical has been approved by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget through September 30, 1997.

Return to title page | Return to table of contents

Introduction

Search Strategy

Sample Citations

Bibliography:

Randomized Controlled Trials of Breast Cancer Screening

Incidence and Mortality of Breast Cancer

Technology for Breast Cancer Screening

Risks and Benefits of Breast Cancer Screening

Supplemental References

Return to title page

Introduction

BREAST CANCER SCREENING IN WOMEN AGES 40-49

A number of randomized clinical trials have shown clearly that early detection of breast cancer by mammography, with and without clinical breast examination at regular intervals ranging from 1 year to 33 months, reduces breast cancer mortality in women ages 50-69 by about a third. However, the picture is not as clear for women 40-49 years of age, and, worldwide, experts continue to examine the data regarding the use of mammography in this age group.

This bibliography was prepared in support of the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on Breast Cancer Screening in Women Ages 40-49 held in Bethesda, MD January 21-23, 1997. The conference addressed these key questions:

Is there a reduction in mortality from breast cancer due to screening women ages 40 to 49 with mammography, with or without physical examination? If so, how large is the benefit? How does it change with age?

What are the risks associated with screening women ages 40-49 with mammography and with physical examination?

Are there other benefits? If so, what are they? How do they change with age?

What is known about how the benefits and risks of breast cancer screening differ based on known risk factors for breast cancer?

What are the directions for future research?

This bibliography primarily includes journal articles from 1985 to 1996, with a few key articles from 1969 to 1984 and a few monographic references. Items were chosen for inclusion based on the following criteria: (1) they directly relate to the questions being addressed by the Conference; (2) they report the results of original research rather than speculation or commentary on the work of others; and (3) they report morbidity and mortality statistics and projections. Most letters and editorials have been excluded.

The bibliography is organized into five major sections: Randomized Controlled Trials of Breast Cancer Screening; Incidence and Mortality of Breast Cancer; Technology for Breast Cancer Screening; Risks and Benefits of Breast Cancer Screening; and Supplemental References containing the journal articles published prior to 1985, monographic references, and other references selected by the Conference speakers. A citation may appear in more than one category. All citations are in English.

The compilers wish to thank Dr. Barnett Kramer, Jay McNeave, and Lori Klein for their assistance in selection and classifying references and in editing and production of the bibliography.

Return to title page | Return to table of contents

Search Strategy

A variety of online databases are usually searched in preparing bibliographies in the CBM series. To assist you in updating or otherwise manipulating the material in this search, the strategy used for the NLM's MEDLINE database is given below. Please note that the search strategies presented here differ from individual demand searches in that they are generally broadly formulated and irrelevant citations edited out prior to printing.

SS 1 = BREAST NEOPLASMS
SS 2 = ADULT OR MIDDLE AGE
SS 3 = 1 AND 2
SS 4 = MAMMOGRAPHY OR ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY OR MASS SCREENING
OR EXPLODE MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING OR PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES
SS 5 = 3 AND 4
SS 6 = TS 5 (TI) :4#: OR :50: OR :<50: OR :FORTY: OR :FORTIES:
SS 7 = TS 5 (AB) :4#: OR :50: OR :<50: OR :FORTY: OR :FORTIES:
SS 8 = PREMENOPAUSE OR AGE FACTORS
SS 9 = 5 AND 8
SS 10 = 6 OR 7 OR 9
SS 11 = SUBHEADINGS APPLY DI, EP, MO, PC, RA, US
SS 11 = BREAST NEOPLASMS
SS 12 = SUBHEADINGS CANCEL
SS 12 = 11 AND 2
SS 13 = TS 12 (TI) :4#: OR :50: OR :<50: OR :FORTY: OR :FORTIES:
SS 14 = TS 12 (AB) :4#: OR :50: OR :<50: OR :FORTY: OR :FORTIES:
SS 15 = 12 AND 8
SS 16 = 13 OR 14 OR 15
SS 17 = 10 OR 16
SS 18 = 17 AND ENG (LA)

GRATEFUL MED and INTERNET GRATEFUL MED

To make online searching easier and more efficient, the Library offers GRATEFUL MED, microcomputer-based software that provides a user-friendly interface to most NLM databases. This software was specifically developed for health professionals and features multiple choice menus and "fill in the blank" screens for easy search preparation. GRATEFUL MED runs on an IBM PC (or IBM-compatible) with DOS 2.0 or Windows or on a Macintosh, and requires a Hayes (or Hayes-compatible) modem. It may be purchased from the National Technical Information Service in Springfield, Virginia, for $29.95 (plus $3.00 per order for shipping). For your convenience, an order blank has been enclosed at the back of this bibliography.

To make online searching easier and more efficient, the Library offers GRATEFUL MED, microcomputer-based software that provides a user-friendly interface to most NLM databases. This software was specifically developed for health professionals and features multiple choice menus and "fill in the blank" screens for easy search preparation. GRATEFUL MED runs on an IBM PC (or IBM-compatible) with DOS 2.0 or a Macintosh, and requires a Hayes (or Hayes-compatible) modem. It may be purchased from the National Technical Information Service in Springfield, Virginia, for $29.95 (plus $3.00 per order for shipping). For your convenience, an order blank has been enclosed at the back of this bibliography.

INTERNET GRATEFUL MED is available from the World Wide Web. The user with Internet access and an NLM user account need only point a compatible Web browser (Netscape Navigator is strongly recommended) to http://igm.nlm.nih.gov. No other software at the user end is required.

Return to title page | Return to table of contents

Sample Citations

Citations are formatted according to the rules established for Index Medicus ®. Sample journal and monograph citations appear below.

Journal Article:

Example:
Kotwall CA, Mahoney LJ. Screening mammography: interpretation of the data. Surg Oncol 1994 Oct;3(5):305-7.

Order, with separating punctuation:
Authors. Article Title. Abbreviated Journal Title Date;Volume(Issue):Pages.

Monograph:

Example:
Kosary CL, et. al., editors. Cancer statistics review 1973-92. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (US); 1995.

Order, with separating punctuation:
Authors/Editors. Title. Place of Publication: Publisher; Date.

*For details of the formats used for references, see the following publication:
Patrias, Karen. National Library of Medicine recommended formats for bibliographic citation. Bethesda (MD): The Library; 1991 Apr. Available from: NTIS, Springfield, VA; PB91-182030.

Return to title page | Return to table of contents

RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS OF BREAST CANCER SCREENING

Alexander F, Roberts MM, Lutz W, Hepburn W. Randomisation by cluster and the problem of social class bias. J Epidemiol Community Health 1989 Mar;43(1):29-36.

Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK, Forrest AP, Hepburn W, Kirkpatrick AE, McDonald C, Muir BB, Prescott RJ, Shepherd SM, et al. The Edinburgh randomised trial of breast cancer screening: results after 10 years of follow-up. Br J Cancer 1994 Sep;70(3) :542-8.

Anderson TJ, Lamb J, Donnan P, Alexander FE, Huggins A, Muir BB, Kirkpatrick AE, Chetty U, Hepburn W, Smith A, et al. Comparative pathology of breast cancer in a randomised trial of screening. Br J Cancer 1991 Jul;64(1):108-13.

Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L, Landberg T, Lindholm K, Linell F, Ljungberg O, Ranstam J, Sigfusson B. Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer: the Malmo mammographic screening trial. BMJ 1988 Oct 15;297(6654):943-8.

Arnesson LG, Smeds S, Fagerberg G. Recurrence-free survival in patients with small breast cancer. An analysis of cancers 10 mm or less detected clinically and by screening. Eur J Surg 1994 May;160(5):271-6.

Baines CJ. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a perspective on criticisms. Ann Intern Med 1994 Feb 15;120(4):326-34.

Baines CJ. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: responses to controversy. Womens Health Issues 1992 Winter;2(4):206-11.

Baines CJ. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Why? What next? And so what? Cancer 1995 Nov 15;76(10 Suppl):2107-12.

Baines CJ, Miller AB, Bassett AA. Physical examination. Its role as a single screening modality in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Cancer 1989 May 1;63(9):1816-22.

Baines CJ, Miller AB, Kopans DB, Moskowitz M, Sanders DE, Sickles EA, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: assessment of technical quality by external review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990 Oct;155(4):743-7; discussion 748-9. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990 Nov;155(5):1133-4.

Burhenne LJ, Burhenne HJ. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a Canadian critique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993 Oct;161(4):761-3.

Chamberlain J. Firmer evidence on the value of breast screening--the Swedish overview. Eur J Cancer 1993;29A(13):1804-5.

Chu KC, Connor RJ. Analysis of the temporal patterns of benefits in the Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York trial by stage and age. Am J Epidemiol 1991 May 15;133(10):1039-49. Published erratum appears in Am J Epidemiol 1994 Aug 1;140(3):302.

Cox B, Smart RA, Smart CR, Hendrick RE. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40-49 years: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials (5). Cancer 1996 Aug 1;78(3):572-4.

Day NE. Screening for breast cancer. Br Med Bull 1991 Apr;47(2):400-15. Published erratum appears in Br Med Bull 1991 Jul;47(3):786.

de Koning HJ, Boer R, Warmerdam PG, Beemsterboer PM, van der Maas PJ. Quantitative interpretation of age-specific mortality reductions from the Swedish breast cancer-screening trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Aug 16;87(16):1217-23. Comments in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Aug 16;87(16):1195-7; J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Aug 16;87(16):1198-1200.

Duffy SW, South MC, Day NE. Cluster randomization in large public health trials: the importance of antecedent data. Stat Med 1992 Feb 15;11(3):307-16.

Edinburgh trial of screening for breast cancer [letter]. Lancet 1990 Apr 21;335(8695):968-9. Comment on: Lancet 1990 Feb 3;335(8684):241-6.

Elwood JM, Cox B, Richardson AK. The effectiveness of breast cancer screening by mammography in younger women. Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993 Feb 25;Doc No 32:[23,227 words; 195 paragraphs]. Comments in: Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993 Mar 26; Doc No 4 2:[1687 words; 8 paragraphs]; Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993 May 28;Doc No 66:[1409 words; 8 paragraphs]. Published errata appear in Online J Curr Clin Trials 1993 Mar 5;Doc No 34:[295 words; 2 paragraphs] and 1994 Mar 31;Doc No 121:[385 words; 4 paragra phs].

Elwood M, Cox B, Richardson A. The effectiveness of breast cancer screening by mammography in younger women: correction [letter]. Online J Curr Clin Trials 1994 Mar 31;Doc No 121:[385 words; 4 paragraphs].

Esserman L, Kerlikowske K. Should we recommend screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49? Oncology (Huntingt) 1996 Mar;10(3):357-64; discussion 370-6.

Fletcher SW, Black W, Harris R, Rimer BK, Shapiro S. Report of the International Workshop on Screening for Breast Cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1644-56. Comment in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1621-4.

Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellstrom L, Lidbrink E, Rutqvist LE, Somell A. Randomized study of mammography screening--preliminary report on mortality in the Stockholm trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1991 Mar;18(1):49-56.

Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellstrom L, Somell A. Analysis of interval breast carcinomas in a randomized screening trial in Stockholm. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1987;9(3):219-25.

Glasziou PP. Meta-analysis adjusting for compliance: the example of screening for breast cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 1992 Nov;45(11):1251-6.

Glasziou PP, Woodward AJ, Mahon CM. Mammographic screening trials for women aged under 50. A quality assessment and meta-analysis. Med J Aust 1995 Jun 19;162(12):625-9. Comment in: Med J Aust 1995 Oct 2;163(7):384-5

Holowaty PH, Miller AB, Baines CJ, Risch H. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: first screen results as predictors of future breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1993 Jan-Feb;2(1):11-9. Comment in: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1993 Jan-Feb;2(1):1-2.

Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Rubin SM, Sandrock C, Ernster VL. Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. JAMA 1995 Jan 11;273(2):149-54. Comments in: JAMA 1995 Aug 2;274(5):381; discussion 382-3; JAMA 1995 Aug 2;274(5):381-2; discussion 382-3; A CP J Club 1995 Sep-Oct;123(2):34-5.

Kopans DB, Feig SA. The Canadian National Breast Screening Study: a critical review. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993 Oct;161(4):755-60.

Kopans DB, Halpern E, Hulka CA. Statistical power in breast cancer screening trials and mortality reduction among women 40-49 years of age with particular emphasis on the National Breast Screening Study of Canada. Cancer 1994 Aug 15;74(4):1196-203.

Kotwall CA, Mahoney LJ. Screening mammography: interpretation of the data. Surg Oncol 1994 Oct;3(5):305-7.

Lidbrink E, Elfving J, Frisell J, Jonsson E. Neglected aspects of false positive findings of mammography in breast cancer screening: analysis of false positive cases from the Stockholm trial. BMJ 1996 Feb 3;312(7026):273-6.

Miller AB. The costs and benefits of breast cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 1993 May-Jun;9(3):175-80.

Miller AB. Mammography in women under 50. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1994 Feb;8(1):165-77.

Miller AB. Mammography screening controversies. Cancer Detect Prev 1994;18(4):305-11.

Miller AB, Baines CJ, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 1. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 40 to 49 years. Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):1459-76. Comments in: Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):143 1-4; Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):1437-9; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):875-6; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):876-7; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):877; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15 ;148(6):877, 880; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):880; discussion 880-3. Published erratum appears in Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 1;148(5):718.

Miller AB, Baines CJ, To T, Wall C. Canadian National Breast Screening Study: 2. Breast cancer detection and death rates among women aged 50 to 59 years. Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):1477-88. Comments in: Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):143 1-4; Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;147(10):1437-9; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):875; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):875-6; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):877; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15; 148(6):877, 880; discussion 880-3; Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 15;148(6):880; discussion 880-3. Published erratum appears in Can Med Assoc J 1993 Mar 1;148(5):718.

Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994 Jul 13;272(2):122-4.

Moss SM, Coleman DA, Ellman R, Chamberlain J, Forrest AP, Kirkpatrick AE, Thomas BA, Price JL. Interval cancers and sensitivity in the screening centres of the UK trial of early detection of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 1993;29A(2):255-8.

Nystrom L, Larsson LG, Rutqvist LE, Lindgren A, Lindqvist M, Ryden S, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Fagerberg G, Frisell J, et al. Determination of cause of death among breast cancer cases in the Swedish randomized mammography screening trials. A comparison between official statistics and validation by an endpoint committee. Acta Oncol 1995;34(2):145-52.

Nystrom L, Rutqvist LE, Wall S, Lindgren A, Lindqvist M, Ryden S, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, Fagerberg G, Frisell J, et al. Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet 1993 Apr 17;341(8851):973-8. Comments in: Lancet 1993 Jun 12;341(8859):1531; discussion 1531-2; Lancet 1993 Aug 28;342(8870):549-50. Published erratum appears in Lancet 1993 Nov 27;342(8883):1372.

Peer PG, Verbeek AL, Straatman H. Sample size determination for a trial of breast cancer screening under age 50: population versus case mortality approach. J Med Screen 1995;2(2):90-3.

Roberts MM, Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Chetty U, Donnan PT, Forrest P, Hepburn W, Huggins A, Kirkpatrick AE, Lamb J, et al. Edinburgh trial of screening for breast cancer: mortality at seven years. Lancet 1990 Feb 3;335(8684):241-6. Comments in: Lance t 1990 Apr 21;335(8695):968-9; Lancet 1990 May 26;335(8700):1290-1.

Shapiro S. Screening: assessment of current studies. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):231-8.

Smart CR, Hendrick RE, Rutledge JH 3rd, Smith RA. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40 to 49 years. Current evidence from randomized controlled trials. Cancer 1995 Apr 1;75(7):1619-26.

Specificity of screening in United Kingdom trial of early detection of breast cancer. BMJ 1992 Feb 8;304(6823):346-9.

Tabar L, Duffy SW, Burhenne LW. New Swedish breast cancer detection results for women aged 40-49. Cancer 1993 Aug 15;72(4 Suppl):1437-48.

Tabar L, Duffy SW, Chen HH. Re: Quantitative interpretation of age-specific mortality reductions from the Swedish Breast Cancer-Screening Trials [letter]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996 Jan 3;88(1):52-5.

Tabar L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer 1987 May;55(5):547-51.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Gad A. Screening for breast cancer in women aged under 50: mode of detection, incidence, fatality, and histology. J Med Screen 1995;2(2):94-8.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Gad A. Tumour development, histology and grade of breast cancers: prognosis and progression. Int J Cancer 1996 May 16;66(4):413-9.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Smart CR, Gad A, Smith RA. Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results from the Swedish Two-County Trial. Cancer 1995 May 15;75(10):2507-17.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE. The Swedish two county trial of mammographic screening for breast cancer: recent results and calculation of benefit. J Epidemiol Community Health 1989 Jun;43(2):107-14.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Day NE, Gad A, Grontoft O. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1992 Jan;30(1):187-210.

Tarone RE. The excess of patients with advanced breast cancer in young women screened with mammography in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Cancer 1995 Feb 15;75(4):997-1003.

Wald NJ, Murphy P, Major P, Parkes C, Townsend J, Frost C. UKCCCR multicentre randomised controlled trial of one and two view mammography in breast cancer screening. BMJ 1995 Nov 4;311(7014):1189-93. Comments in: BMJ 1996 Feb 24;312(7029):508-9; discu ssion 509-10; BMJ 1996 Feb 24;312(7029):509; BMJ 1996 Feb 24;312(7029):509-10.

Return to table of contents

INCIDENCE AND MORTALITY OF BREAST CANCER

Alexander FE, Chamberlain J, Forrest AP. Screening for breast cancer in the under 50s [letter]. Lancet 1993 May 1;341(8853):1149.

Baines CJ. Women and breast cancer: is it really possible for the public to be well informed? [editorial]. Can Med Assoc J 1992 Jun 15;146(12):2147-8. Comment on: Can Med Assoc J 1992 Jun 15;146(12):2167-74. Comment in: Can Med Assoc J 1992 Nov 15;14 7(10):1409-11; discussion 1411-2.

Berg JW, Hutter RV. Breast cancer. Cancer 1995 Jan 1;75(1 Suppl):257-69.

Berrino F, Bouchardy C, Sasco AJ. Screening for breast cancer in pre-menopausal women. Who should decide? Int J Cancer 1995 Jan 17;60(2):153-5.

Bornefalk A, Persson I, Bergstrom R. Trends in breast cancer mortality among Swedish women 1953-92: analyses by age, period and birth cohort. Br J Cancer 1995 Aug;72(2):493-7.

Breast Cancer in Younger Women. Proceedings of a conference. Bethesda, Maryland, January 28, 1993. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1994;(16):1-222.

Breast cancer screening in women under 50 [editorial]. Lancet 1991 Jun 29;337(8757):1575-6. Comments in: Lancet 1991 Jul 13;338(8759):113-4; Lancet 1991 Aug 17;338(8764):447; Lancet 1991 Aug 31;338(8766):583.

Breast screening in women under 50 [letter]. Lancet 1991 Jul 13;338(8759):113-4. Comment on: Lancet 1991 Jun 29;337(8757):1575-6. Comment in: Lancet 1991 Aug 17;338(8764):447.

Brekelmans CT, Collette HJ, Collette C, Fracheboud J, de Waard F. Breast cancer after a negative screen: follow-up of women participating in the DOM Screening Programme. Eur J Cancer 1992;28A(4-5):893-5.

Brown BW, Brauner C, Minnotte MC. Noncancer deaths in white adult cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Jun 16;85(12):979-87.

Burhenne HJ, Burhenne LW, Goldberg F, Hislop TG, Worth AJ, Rebbeck PM, Kan L. Interval breast cancers in the Screening Mammography Program of British Columbia: analysis and classification. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994 May;162(5):1067-71; discussion 1072-5. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 May;164(5):1298-9.

Byrne C, Smart CR, Chu KC, Hartmann WH. Survival advantage differences by age. Evaluation of the extended follow-up of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):301-10.

Chamberlain J. Breast cancer screening--right or wrong? Trans Med Soc Lond 1990-91;107:53-7.

Choi WS, Parker BA, Pierce JP, Greenberg ER. Regional differences in the incidence and treatment of carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1996 Apr;5(4):317-20.

Deaths from breast cancer. 1991. Wkly Epidemiol Rec 1994 Jun 24;69(25):185-7.

Deaths from breast cancer--United States, 1991. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1994 Apr 22;43(15):273, 279-81.

Eckhardt S, Badellino F, Murphy GP. UICC meeting on breast-cancer screening in pre-menopausal women in developed countries. Geneva, 29 September-1 October 1993. Int J Cancer 1994 Jan 2;56(1):1-5.

European Group for Breast Cancer Screening. Recommendations for breast cancer screening. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol 1990;11(6):489-90.

Feuer EJ, Wun LM. How much of the recent rise in breast cancer incidence can be explained by increases in mammography utilization? A dynamic population model approach. Am J Epidemiol 1992 Dec 15;136(12):1423-36.

First results on mortality reduction in the UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer. UK Trial of Early Detection of Breast Cancer Group. Lancet 1988 Aug 20;2(8608):411-6.

Fletcher SW. Why question screening mammography for women in their forties? Radiol Clin North Am 1995 Nov;33(6):1259-71.

Forrest AP, Alexander FE. A question that will not go away: at what age should mammographic screening begin? [editorial]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Aug 16;87(16):1195-7. Comment on: J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Aug 16;87(16):1217-23.

Henderson IC. Small differences, big implications. J Clin Oncol 1990 Aug;8(8):1297-300.

Hermon C, Beral V. Breast cancer mortality rates are levelling off or beginning to decline in many western countries: analysis of time trends, age-cohort and age-period models of breast cancer mortality in 20 countries. Br J Cancer 1996 Apr;73(7):955-6 0.

Hoel DG, Davis DL, Miller AB, Sondik EJ, Swerdlow AJ. Trends in cancer mortality in 15 industrialized countries, 1969-1986. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992 Mar 4;84(5):313-20.

Kessler LG, Feuer EJ, Brown ML. Projections of the breast cancer burden to U.S. women: 1990-2000. Prev Med 1991 Jan;20(1):170-82.

Klawansky S, Berkey C, Shah N, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. Survival from localized breast cancer. Variability across trials and registries. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1993 Fall;9(4):539-53.

Kopans DB. Mammography screening and the controversy concerning women aged 40 to 49. Radiol Clin North Am 1995 Nov;33(6):1273-90.

Kopans DB. Screening for breast cancer and mortality reduction among women 40-49 years of age. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):311-22.

Miller AB, Howe GR, Sherman GJ, Lindsay JP, Yaffe MJ, Dinner PJ, Risch HA, Preston DL. Mortality from breast cancer after irradiation during fluoroscopic examinations in patients being treated for tuberculosis. N Engl J Med 1989 Nov 9;321(19):1285-9.

Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994 Jul 13;272(2):122-4.

Peer PG, Verbeek AL, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH, Holland R. Prognosis of younger and older patients with early breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1996 Feb;73(3):382-5.

Peer PG, Werre JM, Mravunac M, Hendriks JH, Holland R, Verbeek AL. Effect on breast cancer mortality of biennial mammographic screening of women under age 50. Int J Cancer 1995 Mar 16;60(6):808-11.

Public health focus: mammography. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1992 Jun 26;41(25):454-9.

Quinn M, Allen E. Changes in incidence of and mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales since introduction of screening. United Kingdom Association of Cancer Registries. BMJ 1995 Nov 25;311(7017):1391-5. Comments in: BMJ 1996 Mar 9;312(7031):6 39-40; BMJ 1996 Mar 9;312(7031):640.

Riggs JE. Longitudinal Gompertzian analysis of breast cancer mortality in the U.S., 1962-1987: demonstration of a disorder displaying complex deterministic mortality dynamics. Mech Ageing Dev 1991 Oct;60(2):123-33.

Sickles EA, Kopans DB. Mammographic screening for women aged 40 to 49 years: the primary care practitioner's dilemma. Ann Intern Med 1995 Apr 1;122(7):534-8. Comments in: Ann Intern Med 1995 Apr 1;122(7):550-2; Ann Intern Med 1995 Oct 15;123(8):634-5.

Sondik EJ. Breast cancer trends. Incidence, mortality, and survival. Cancer 1994 Aug 1;74(3 Suppl):995-9.

Sturgeon SR, Schairer C, Gail M, McAdams M, Brinton LA, Hoover RN. Geographic variation in mortality from breast cancer among white women in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Dec 20;87(24):1846-53. Comment in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Dec 20;8 7(24):1819-20.

Swanson GM, Ragheb NE, Lin CS, Hankey BF, Miller B, Horn-Ross P, White E, Liff JM, Harlan LC, McWhorter WP, et al. Breast cancer among black and white women in the 1980s. Changing patterns in the United States by race, age, and extent of disease. Cance r 1993 Aug 1;72(3):788-98. Comment in: Cancer 1993 Aug 1;72(3):637-8.

Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Chen HH, Duffy SW, Gad A. Screening for breast cancer in women aged under 50: mode of detection, incidence, fatality, and histology. J Med Screen 1995;2(2):94-8.

Tarone RE, Chu KC. Implications of birth cohort patterns in interpreting trends in breast cancer rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 1992 Sep 16;84(18):1402-10.

Thurfjell EL, Lindgren JA. Breast cancer survival rates with mammographic screening: similar favorable survival rates for women younger and those older than 50 years. Radiology 1996 Nov;201(2):421-6.

Wald NJ, Chamberlain J, Hackshaw A. European Society of Mastology Consensus Conference on breast cancer screening: report of the evaluation committee. Br J Radiol 1994 Oct;67(802):925-33.

Wun LM, Feuer EJ, Miller BA. Are increases in mammographic screening still a valid explanation for trends in breast cancer incidence in the United States? Cancer Causes Control 1995 Mar;6(2):135-44.

Return to table of contents

TECHNOLOGY FOR BREAST CANCER SCREENING

Anderson ED, Muir BB, Walsh JS, Kirkpatrick AE. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 1994 Apr;49(4):248-51. Comment in: Clin Radiol 1995 Jan;50(1):67.

Anttinen I, Pamilo M, Soiva M, Roiha M. Double reading of mammography screening films--one radiologist or two? Clin Radiol 1993 Dec;48(6):414-21. Comment in: Clin Radiol 1994 Aug;49(8):584-5.

Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Floyd CE Jr. Breast imaging reporting and data system standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996 Apr;166(4):773-8. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996 Apr;166(4):779-8 0.

Bassett LW, Liu TH, Giuliano AE, Gold RH. The prevalence of carcinoma in palpable vs impalpable, mammographically detected lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1991 Jul;157(1):21-4. Comments in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992 Mar;158(3):688-9; AJR Am J Roentgenol 1 993 Mar;160(3):660-1.

Bassett LW, Ysrael M, Gold RH, Ysrael C. Usefulness of mammography and sonography in women less than 35 years of age. Radiology 1991 Sep;180(3):831-5.

Bates AT, Bates T, Hastrich DJ, Mackie ME, Padley SJ, Corfield NS, Padley NR. Delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer: the effect of the introduction of fine needle aspiration cytology to a breast clinic. Eur J Surg Oncol 1992 Oct;18(5):433-7. Comment in: Eur J Surg Oncol 1993 Jun;19(3):309-10.

Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists: Findings from a national sample. Arch Intern Med 1996;156(2):209-13.

Bennett IC, Freitas R Jr, Fentiman IS. Diagnosis of breast cancer in young women. Aust N Z J Surg 1991 Apr;61(4):284-9.

Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, Fishell EK, Little LE, Miller AB, Lockwood GA, Tritchler DL, Yaffe MJ. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Ins t 1995 May 3;87(9):670-5.

Bryan S, Brown J, Warren R. Mammography screening: An incremental cost effectiveness analysis of two view versus one view procedures in London. J Epidemiol Community Health 1995;49(1):70-8.

Burhenne LJ, Burhenne HJ, Kan L. Quality-oriented mass mammography screening. Radiology 1995 Jan;194(1):185-8.

Cady B, Stone MD, Schuler JG, Thakur R, Wanner MA, Lavin PT. The new era in breast cancer. Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg 1996 Mar;131(3):301-8.

Campbell HS, Fletcher SW, Pilgrim CA, Morgan TM, Lin S. Improving physicians' and nurses' clinical breast examination: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Prev Med 1991 Jan-Feb;7(1):1-8.

Chew SB, Hughes M, Kennedy C, Gillett D, Carmalt H. Mammographically negative breast cancer at the Strathfield Breast Centre. Aust N Z J Surg 1996 Mar;66(3):134-7. Comment in: Aust N Z J Surg 1996 Mar;66(3):133.

Ciatto S, Bonardi R, Cataliotti L, Cardona G. Intraductal breast carcinoma. Review of a multicenter series of 350 cases. Coordinating Center and Writing Committee of FONCAM (National Task Force for Breast Cancer), Italy. Tumori 1990 Dec 31;76(6):552-4. Comment in: Tumori 1991 Aug 31;77(4):I.

Ciatto S, Del Turco MR, Morrone D, Catarzi S, Ambrogetti D, Cariddi A, Zappa M. Independent double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 1995;2(2):99-101.

Ciatto S, Rosselli Del Turco M, Zappa M. The detectability of breast cancer by screening mammography. Br J Cancer 1995 Feb;71(2):337-9.

Coveney EC, Geraghty JG, O'Laoide R, Hourihane JB, O'Higgins NJ. Reasons underlying negative mammography in patients with palpable breast cancer. Clin Radiol 1994 Feb;49(2):123-5.

Curpen BN, Sickles EA, Sollitto RA, Ominsky SH, Galvin HB, Frankel SD. The comparative value of mammographic screening for women 40-49 years old versus women 50-64 years old. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 May;164(5):1099-103. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgeno l 1995 May;164(5):1104-6.

Day PJ, O'Rourke MG. The diagnosis of breast cancer: a clinical and mammographic comparison. Med J Aust 1990 Jun 18;152(12):635-9. Comments in: Med J Aust 1990 Sep 17;153(6):363-4; Med J Aust 1990 Oct 1;153(7):428-9; Med J Aust 1990 Oct 1;153(7):431-2 .

Duncan AA, Wallis MG. Classifying interval cancers. Clin Radiol 1995 Nov;50(11):774-7.

Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994 Dec 1;331(22):1493-9. Comments in: N Engl J Med 1994 Dec 1;331(22):1521-2; N Engl J Med 1995 May-Jun;122(3):74.

Feig SA. Determination of mammographic screening intervals with surrogate measures for women aged 40-49 years [editorial]. Radiology 1994 Nov;193(2):311-4. Comment on: Radiology 1994 Nov;193(2):351-7.

Feig SA. Strategies for improving sensitivity of screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years [editorial]. JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):73-4. Comments on: JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):33-8; JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):39-43.

Frankel SD, Sickles EA, Curpen BN, Sollitto RA, Ominsky SH, Galvin HB. Initial versus subsequent screening mammography: comparison of findings and their prognostic significance. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 May;164(5):1107-9.

Geise RA, Palchevsky A. Composition of mammographic phantom materials. Radiology 1996 Feb;198(2):347-50.

Harms SE, Flamig DP, Hesley KL, Meiches MD, Jensen RA, Evans WP, Savino DA, Wells RV. MR imaging of the breast with rotating delivery of excitation off resonance: clinical experience with pathologic correlation. Radiology 1993 May;187(2):493-501.

Ikeda DM, Andersson I, Wattsgard C, Janzon L, Linell F. Interval carcinomas in the Malmo Mammographic Screening Trial: radiographic appearance and prognostic considerations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992 Aug;159(2):287-94. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1 993 Jul;161(1):207-8.

Kedar RP, Cosgrove DO, Bamber JC, Bell DS. Automated quantification of color Doppler signals: a preliminary study in breast tumors. Radiology 1995 Oct;197(1):39-43.

Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Eaton A, Ernster V. Positive predictive value of screening mammography by age and family history of breast cancer. JAMA 1993 Nov 24;270(20):2444-50. Comment in: JAMA 1994 Apr 6;271(13):982-3.

Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V. Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):33-8. Comment in: JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):73-4.

Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V. Likelihood ratios for modern screening mammography. Risk of breast cancer based on age and mammographic interpretation. JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):39-43. Comment in: JAMA 1996 Jul 3;276(1):73-4.

Kopans DB, Moore RH, McCarthy KA, Hall DA, Hulka CA, Whitman GJ, Slanetz PJ, Halpern EF. Positive predictive value of breast biopsy performed as a result of mammography: there is no abrupt change at age 50 years. Radiology 1996 Aug;200(2):357-60.

Lannin DR, Harris RP, Swanson FH, Edwards MS, Swanson MS, Pories WJ. Difficulties in diagnosis of carcinoma of the breast in patients less than fifty years of age. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1993 Nov;177(5):457-62. Comment in: J Am Coll Surg 1994 Oct;179(4): 505-8.

Peer PG, Verbeek AL, Straatman H, Hendriks JH, Holland R. Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1996;38(2):153-60.

Sibbering DM, Burrell HC, Evans AJ, Yeoman LJ, Wilson AR, Robertson JF, Blamey RW. Mammographic sensitivity in women under 50 years presenting symptomatically with breast cancer. Breast 1995;4(2):127-9.

Smart CR. Highlights of the evidence of benefit for women aged 40-49 years from the 14-year follow-up of the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):296-300.

Sterns EE. Relation between clinical and mammographic diagnosis of breast problems and the cancer/biopsy rate. Can J Surg 1996;39(2):128-32.

Thurfjell E. Mammography screening. One versus two views and independent double reading. Acta Radiol 1994 Jul;35(4):345-50.

Thurfjell E. Mammography screening methods and diagnostic results. Acta Radiol Suppl 1995;395:1-22.

Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AA. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 1994 Apr;191(1):241-4. Comment in: Radiology 1994 Nov;193(2):582.

Young KC, Wallis MG, Ramsdale ML. Mammographic film density and detection of small breast cancers. Clin Radiol 1994 Jul;49(7):461-5.

Return to table of contents

RISKS AND BENEFITS OF BREAST CANCER SCREENING

Ahlgren J, Stal O, Westman G, Arnesson LG. Prediction of axillary lymph node metastases in a screened breast cancer population. South-East Sweden Breast Cancer Group. Acta Oncol 1994;33(6):603-8.

Alcohol and breast cancer. N Y State J Med 1992 Mar;92(3):117.

Arnerlov C, Emdin SO, Lundgren B, Roos G, Soderstrom J, Bjersing L, Norberg C, Angquist KA. Breast carcinoma growth rate described by mammographic doubling time and S-phase fraction. Correlations to clinical and histopathologic factors in a screened po pulation. Cancer 1992 Oct 1;70(7):1928-34.

Arnesson LG, Vitak B, Manson JC, Fagerberg G, Smeds S. Diagnostic outcome of repeated mammography screening. World J Surg 1995 May-Jun;19(3):372-7; discussion 377-8.

Austoker J. Screening and self examination for breast cancer. BMJ 1994 Jul 16;309(6948):168-74. Comments in: BMJ 1994 Sep 10;309(6955):664; BMJ 1994 Sep 10;309(6955):664-5.

Barrett-Connor E, Friedlander NJ. Dietary fat, calories, and the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women: a prospective population-based study. J Am Coll Nutr 1993 Aug;12(4):390-9.

Bartow SA, Pathak DR, Mettler FA. Radiographic microcalcification and parenchymal patterns as indicators of histologic high-risk benign breast disease. Cancer 1990 Oct 15;66(8):1721-5.

Bartow SA, Pathak DR, Mettler FA, Key CR, Pike MC. Breast mammographic pattern: a concatenation of confounding and breast cancer risk factors. Am J Epidemiol 1995 Oct 15;142(8):813-9.

Baum M. The breast screening controversy. Eur J Cancer 1996 Jan;32A(1):9-11.

Berrino F, Bouchardy C, Sasco AJ. Screening for breast cancer in pre-menopausal women. Who should decide? Int J Cancer 1995 Jan 17;60(2):153-5.

Black WC, Nease RF Jr, Tosteson AN. Perceptions of breast cancer risk and screening effectiveness in women younger than 50 years of age. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 May 17;87(10):720-31. Comment in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 May 17;87(10):703-4.

Boice JD Jr, Mandel JS, Doody MM. Breast cancer among radiologic technologists. JAMA 1995 Aug 2;274(5):394-401.

Boice JD Jr, Miller RW. Risk of breast cancer in ataxia-telangiectasia [letter]. N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1357-8; discussion 1360-1. Comment on: N Engl J Med 1991 Dec 26;325(26):1831-6.

Bonnier P, Romain S, Charpin C, Lejeune C, Tubiana N, Martin PM, Piana L. Age as a prognostic factor in breast cancer: relationship to pathologic and biologic features. Int J Cancer 1995 Jul 17;62(2):138-44.

Brekelmans CT, Peeters PH, Faber JA, Deurenberg JJ, Collette HJ. The epidemiological profile of women with an interval cancer in the DOM screening programme. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1994;30(3):223-32.

Brown ML, Houn F, Sickles EA, Kessler LG. Screening mammography in community practice: positive predictive value of abnormal findings and yield of follow-up diagnostic procedures. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1995 Dec;165(6):1373-7.

Bryant HE, Brasher PM. Risks and probabilities of breast cancer: short-term versus lifetime probabilities. Can Med Assoc J 1994 Jan 15;150(2):211-6.

Bull AR, Campbell MJ. Assessment of the psychological impact of a breast screening programme. Br J Radiol 1991 Jun;64(762):510-5. Comment in: Br J Radiol 1992 Jun;65(774):553-4.

Byrne C, Brinton LA, Haile RW, Schairer C. Heterogeneity of the effect of family history on breast cancer risk. Epidemiology 1991 Jul;2(4):276-84.

Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, Parekh N, Salane M, Brinton LA, Hoover R, Haile R. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Nov 1;87(21):1622-9.

Campbell MK, Feuer EJ, Wun LM. Cohort-specific risks of developing breast cancer to age 85 in Connecticut. Epidemiology 1994 May;5(3):290-6.

Cataliotti L, Distante V, Ciatto S, Bianchi S, Pacini P, Simoncini R, Rosselli Del Turco M, Cardona G, Falli F. Intraductal breast cancer: review of 183 consecutive cases. Eur J Cancer 1992;28A(4-5):917-20.

Chadha M, Chabon AB, Friedmann P, Vikram B. Predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with T1 breast cancer. A multivariate analysis. Cancer 1994 Jan 15;73(2):350-3.

Chung M, Chang HR, Bland KI, Wanebo HJ. Younger women with breast carcinoma have a poorer prognosis than older women. Cancer 1996 Jan 1;77(1):97-103.

Ciatto S, Zappa M. A prospective study of the value of mammographic patterns as indicators of breast cancer risk in a screening experience. Eur J Radiol 1993 Sep;17(2):122-5.

Claus EB. Genetic epidemiology of breast cancer in younger women. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1994;(16):49-53.

Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD, Carter D. Relationship between breast histopathology and family history of breast cancer. Cancer 1993 Jan 1;71(1):147-53.

Cooper CL, Faragher EB. Psychosocial stress and breast cancer: the inter-relationship between stress events, coping strategies and personality. Psychol Med 1993 Aug;23(3):653-62.

Crowe JP Jr, Gordon NH, Shenk RR, Zollinger RM Jr, Brumberg DJ, Shuck JM. Age does not predict breast cancer outcome. Arch Surg 1994 May;129(5):483-7; discussion 487-8.

de Haes JC, de Koning HJ, van Oortmarssen GJ, van Agt HM, de Bruyn AE, van Der Maas PJ. The impact of a breast cancer screening programme on quality-adjusted life-years. Int J Cancer 1991 Oct 21;49(4):538-44.

den Tonkelaar I, Seidell JC, Collette HJ. Body fat distribution in relation to breast cancer in women participating in the DOM-project. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995 Apr;34(1):55-61.

Dershaw DD. Mammographic screening in women 40 to 49 years old. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1995 Sep 30;768:53-9.

Dershaw DD, Abramson A, Kinne DW. Ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic findings and clinical implications. Radiology 1989 Feb;170(2):411-5.

Dorant E, van den Brandt PA, Goldbohm RA. Allium vegetable consumption, garlic supplement intake, and female breast carcinoma incidence. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995;33(2):163-70.

Duffy SW, South MC, Day NE. Cluster randomization in large public health trials: the importance of antecedent data. Stat Med 1992 Feb 15;11(3):307-16.

Duffy SW, Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Gad A, Grontoft O, South MC, Day NE. Breast screening, prognostic factors and survival--results from the Swedish two county study. Br J Cancer 1991 Dec;64(6):1133-8.

Eddy DM. Screening for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 1989 Sep 1;111(5):389-99. Comment in: Ann Intern Med 1989 Nov 15;111(10):858-9.

Ellman R, Angeli N, Christians A, Moss S, Chamberlain J, Maguire P. Psychiatric morbidity associated with screening for breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1989 Nov;60(5):781-4.

Ernster VL, Barclay J, Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Henderson C. Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. JAMA 1996 Mar 27;275(12):913-8. Comment in: JAMA 1996 Mar 27;275(12):948-9.

Eusebi V, Foschini MP, Cook MG, Berrino F, Azzopardi JG. Long-term follow-up of in situ carcinoma of the breast with special emphasis on clinging carcinoma. Semin Diagn Pathol 1989 May;6(2):165-73.

Evans DG, Fentiman IS, McPherson K, Asbury D, Ponder BA, Howell A. Familial breast cancer. BMJ 1994 Jan 15;308(6922):183-7. Comment in: BMJ 1994 Mar 12;308(6930):716.

Feig SA. Assessment of radiation risk from screening mammography [editorial]. Cancer 1996 Mar 1;77(5):818-22. Comment on: Cancer 1996 Mar 1;77(5):903-9.

Feig SA. A new method for assessment of radiation risk from screening mammography. Recent Results Cancer Res 1990;119:141-50.

Feig SA, Ehrlich SM. Estimation of radiation risk from screening mammography: recent trends and comparison with expected benefits. Radiology 1990 Mar;174(3 Pt 1):638-47.

Fine MK, Rimer BK, Watts P. Women's responses to the mammography experience. J Am Board Fam Pract 1993 Nov-Dec;6(6):546-55.

Fisher ER, Leeming R, Anderson S, Redmond C, Fisher B. Conservative management of intraductal carcinoma (DCIS) of the breast. Collaborating NSABP investigators [Prior annotation incorrect]. J Surg Oncol 1991 Jul;47(3):139-47.

Fletcher SW. Why question screening mammography for women in their forties? Radiol Clin North Am 1995 Nov;33(6):1259-71.

Foster RS Jr, Farwell ME, Costanza MC. Breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer: patterns of care in a geographic region and estimation of potential applicability. Ann Surg Oncol 1995 May;2(3):275-80.

Fowble BL, Schultz DJ, Overmoyer B, Solin LJ, Fox K, Jardines L, Orel S, Glick JH. The influence of young age on outcome in early stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1994 Aug 30;30(1):23-33.

Frisell J, Eklund G, Hellstrom L, Glas U, Somell A. The Stockholm breast cancer screening trial--5-year results and stage at discovery. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1989 Jan;13(1):79-87.

Gram IT, Lund E, Slenker SE. Quality of life following a false positive mammogram. Br J Cancer 1990 Dec;62(6):1018-22.

Gram IT, Slenker SE. Cancer anxiety and attitudes toward mammography among screening attenders, nonattenders, and women never invited. Am J Public Health 1992 Feb;82(2):249-51.

Guenther JM, Kirgan DM, Giuliano AE. Feasibility of breast-conserving therapy for younger women with breast cancer. Arch Surg 1996 Jun;131(6):632-6.

Hakama M, Holli K, Isola J, Kallioniemi OP, Karkkainen A, Visakorpi T, Pukkala E, Saarenmaa I, Geiger U, Ikkala J, et al. Aggressiveness of screen-detected breast cancers. Lancet 1995 Jan 28;345(8944):221-4. Comments in: Lancet 1995 Apr 1;345(8953):85 3; discussion 854-5; Lancet 1995 Apr 1;345(8953):853-4; discussion 854-5; Lancet 1995 Apr 1;345(8953):854; discussion 854-5.

Hall EJ, Geard CR, Brenner DJ. Risk of breast cancer in ataxia-telangiectasia [letter]. N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1358-9; discussion 1360-1. Comment on: N Engl J Med 1991 Dec 26;325(26):1831-6.

Hancock SL, Tucker MA, Hoppe RT. Breast cancer after treatment of Hodgkin's disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Jan 6;85(1):25-31.

Harris R, Leininger L. Clinical strategies for breast cancer screening: weighing and using the evidence. Ann Intern Med 1995 Apr 1;122(7):539-47. Comment in: Ann Intern Med 1995 Apr 1;122(7):550-2.

Hellman S. Karnofsky Memorial Lecture. Natural history of small breast cancers. J Clin Oncol 1994 Oct;12(10):2229-34. Comment in: J Clin Oncol 1996 Jan;14(1):321-2.

Helzlsouer KJ, Harris EL, Parshad R, Perry HR, Price FM, Sanford KK. DNA repair proficiency: potential susceptiblity factor for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996 Jun 5;88(11):754-5.

Hetelekidis S, Schnitt SJ, Morrow M, Harris JR. Management of ductal carcinoma in situ. CA Cancer J Clin 1995 Jul-Aug;45(4):244-53.

Howe GR, McLaughlin J. Breast cancer mortality between 1950 and 1987 after exposure to fractionated moderate-dose-rate ionizing radiation in the Canadian fluoroscopy cohort study and a comparison with breast cancer mortality in the atomic bomb survivor s study. Radiat Res 1996 Jun;145(6):694-707.

Hrubec Z, Boice JD Jr, Monson RR, Rosenstein M. Breast cancer after multiple chest fluoroscopies: second follow-up of Massachusetts women with tuberculosis. Cancer Res 1989 Jan 1;49(1):229-34.

Jatoi I, Sickles EA, Kopans DB. Mammographic screening for women 40 to 49 years of age [letter]. Ann Intern Med 1995 Oct 15;123(8)634-5. Comment on: Ann Intern Med 1995 Apr 1;122(7):534-8.

Joensuu H, Asola R, Holli K, Kumpulainen E, Nikkanen V, Parvinen LM. Delayed diagnosis and large size of breast cancer after a false negative mammogram. Eur J Cancer 1994;30A(9):1299-302.

Klemi PJ, Joensuu H, Toikkanen S, Tuominen J, Rasanen O, Tyrkko J, Parvinen I. Aggressiveness of breast cancers found with and without screening. BMJ 1992 Feb 22;304(6825):467-9. Comment in: BMJ 1992 May 23;304(6838):1377-8.

Land CE. Risk of breast cancer in ataxia-telangiectasia [letter]. N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1359-61. Comment on: N Engl J Med 1991 Dec 26;325(26):1831-6.

Land CE. Studies of cancer and radiation dose among atomic bomb survivors. The example of breast cancer. JAMA 1995 Aug 2;274(5):402-7. Comment in: JAMA 1995 Aug 2;274(5):427-8.

Land CE, Hayakawa N, Machado SG, Yamada Y, Pike MC, Akiba S, Tokunaga M. A case-control interview study of breast cancer among Japanese A-bomb survivors. II. Interactions with radiation dose. Cancer Causes Control 1994 Mar;5(2):167-76.

Lavin MF, Bennett I, Ramsay J, Gardiner RA, Seymour GJ, Farrell A, Walsh M. Identification of a potentially radiosensitive subgroup among patients with breast cancer . J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Nov 2;86(21):1627-34. Comment in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 N ov 2;86(21):1571-2.

Law J. Risk and benefit associated with radiation dose in breast screening programmes--an update. Br J Radiol 1995 Aug;68(812):870-6.

Law J. Variations in individual radiation dose in a breast screening programme and consequences for the balance between associated risk and benefit. Br J Radiol 1993 Aug;66(788):691-8.

Lee HP, Gourley L, Duffy SW, Esteve J, Lee J, Day NE. Risk factors for breast cancer by age and menopausal status: a case-control study in Singapore. Cancer Causes Control 1992 Jul;3(4):313-22.

Leitner SP, Swern AS, Weinberger D, Duncan LJ, Hutter RV. Predictors of recurrence for patients with small (one centimeter or less) localized breast cancer (T1a,b N0 M0). Cancer 1995 Dec 1;76(11):2266-74.

Lerman C, Kash K, Stefanek M. Younger women at increased risk for breast cancer: perceived risk, psychological well-being, and surveillance behavior. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1994;(16):171-6.

Lerman C, Rimer BK, Engstrom PF. Cancer risk notification: psychosocial and ethical implications. J Clin Oncol 1991 Jul;9(7):1275-82.

Lerman C, Ross E, Boyce A, Gorchov PM, McLaughlin R, Rimer B, Engstrom P. The impact of mailing psychoeducational materials to women with abnormal mammograms. Am J Public Health 1992 May;82(5):729-30.

Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Boyce A, Jepson C, Engstrom PF. Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms. Ann Intern Med 1991 Apr 15;114(8):657-61.

Lerman C, Trock B, Rimer BK, Jepson C, Brody D, Boyce A. Psychological side effects of breast cancer screening. Health Psychol 1991;10(4):259-67.

Lidbrink E, Levi L, Pettersson I, Rosendahl I, Rutqvist LE, de la Torre B, Wasserman J, Weige M. Single-view screening mammography: psychological, endocrine and immunological effects of recalling for a complete three-view examination. Eur J Cancer 1995 Jun;31A(6):932-3.

Madigan MP, Ziegler RG, Benichou J, Byrne C, Hoover RN. Proportion of breast cancer cases in the United States explained by well-established risk factors. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 Nov 15;87(22):1681-5.

Malone KE, Daling JR, Weiss NS, McKnight B, White E, Voigt LF. Family history and survival of young women with invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 1996 Oct 1;78(7):1417-25.

Mammography and clinical breast examinations among women aged 50 years and older--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1992. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1993 Oct 1;42(38):737-41.

Mansour EG, Ravdin PM, Dressler L. Prognostic factors in early breast carcinoma. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):381-400.

Margolese R. Screening mammography in young women: a different perspective. Lancet 1996 Mar 30;347(9005):881-2.

Mattsson A, Ruden BI, Hall P, Wilking N, Rutqvist LE. Radiation-induced breast cancer: long-term follow-up of radiation therapy for benign breast disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1679-85. Comments in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Jan 5;86(1): 66-7; J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Mar 2;86(5):393-4.

McCarthy BD, Yood MU, Boohaker EA, Ward RE, Rebner M, Johnson CC. Inadequate follow-up of abnormal mammograms. Am J Prev Med 1996 Jul-Aug;12(4):282-8.

Mettler FA, Upton AC, Kelsey CA, Ashby RN, Rosenberg RD, Linver MN. Benefits versus risks from mammography: a critical reassessment. Cancer 1996 Mar 1;77(5):903-9. Comment in: Cancer 1996 Mar 1;77(5):818-22.

Miller AB. The costs and benefits of breast cancer screening. Am J Prev Med 1993 May-Jun;9(3):175-80.

Neugut AI, Jacobson JS. The limitations of breast cancer screening for first-degree relatives of breast cancer patients. Am J Public Health 1995 Jun;85(6):832-4.

Nielsen M, Thomsen JL, Primdahl S, Dyreborg U, Andersen JA. Breast cancer and atypia among young and middle-aged women: a study of 110 medicolegal autopsies. Br J Cancer 1987 Dec;56(6):814-9.

Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Jensen RA, Schuyler PA. Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15-25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer 1995 Oct 1;76(7):1197-200.

Reynolds JV, Sweeney JP, Nolan N, Korebrits A, Duffy MJ, McDermott EW, O'Higgins NJ. Management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ir J Med Sci 1993 Feb;162(2):45-8.

Rimer BK. Putting the informed in informed consent about mammography [editorial]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 May 17;87(10):703-4. Comment on: J Natl Cancer Inst 1995 May 17;87(10):720-31.

Rimer BK, Keintz MK, Kessler HB, Engstrom PF, Rosan JR. Why women resist screening mammography: patient-related barriers. Radiology 1989 Jul;172(1):243-6.

Ringberg A, Andersson I, Aspegren K, Linell F. Breast carcinoma in situ in 167 women--incidence, mode of presentation, therapy and follow-up. Eur J Surg Oncol 1991 Oct;17(5):466-76.

Rosenberg L, Palmer JR, Miller DR, Clarke EA, Shapiro S. A case-control study of alcoholic beverage consumption and breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1990 Jan;131(1):6-14.

Rossi S, Cinini C, Di Pietro C, Lombardi CP, Crucitti A, Bellantone R, Crucitti F. Diagnostic delay in breast cancer: correlation with disease stage and prognosis. Tumori 1990 Dec 31;76(6):559-62.

Sanderson M, Williams MA, Malone KE, Stanford JL, Emanuel I, White E, Daling JR. Perinatal factors and risk of breast cancer. Epidemiology 1996 Jan;7(1):34-7.

Schneider T, Hubert D, Degrange JP, Bertin M. Use of risk projection models for the comparison of mortality from radiation-induced breast cancer in various populations. Health Phys 1995 Apr;68(4):452-9.

Schnitt SJ, Hayman J, Gelman R, Eberlein TJ, Love SM, Mayzel K, Osteen RT, Nixon AJ, Pierce S, Connolly JL, Cohen P, Schneider L, Silver B, Recht A, Harris JR. A prospective study of conservative surgery alone in the treatment of selected patients with stage I breast cancer. Cancer 1996 Mar 15;77(6):1094-100.

Seidman JD, Schnaper LA, Aisner SC. Relationship of the size of the invasive component of the primary breast carcinoma to axillary lymph node metastasis. Cancer 1995 Jan 1;75(1):65-71.

Servomaa A, Parviainen T, Komppa T. Patient doses and radiation risks in film-screen mammography in Finland. Radiat Prot Dosim 1995;57(1-4):449-54.

Shore RE, Hildreth N, Woodard E, Dvoretsky P, Hempelmann L, Pasternack B. Breast cancer among women given X-ray therapy for acute postpartum mastitis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1986 Sep;77(3):689-96.

Spiegelman D, Colditz GA, Hunter D, Hertzmark E. Validation of the Gail et al. model for predicting individual breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Apr 20;86(8):600-7. Comments in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Apr 20;86(8):573-5; J Natl Cancer Inst 1 994 Sep 7;86(17):1350; J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Sep 7;86(17):1350; discussion 1350-2.

Sterns EE. The abnormal mammogram in women with clinically normal breasts. Can J Surg 1995 Apr;38(2):168-72. Comments in: Can J Surg 1995 Apr;38(2):110-1; Can J Surg 1995 Dec;38(6):552-3.

Stoll BA. Quantifying the risk of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1991 Feb;17(1):36-41.

Sutton S, Saidi G, Bickler G, Hunter J. Does routine screening for breast cancer raise anxiety? Results from a three wave prospective study in England. J Epidemiol Community Health 1995 Aug;49(4):413-8.

Swanson GM, Lin CS. Survival patterns among younger women with breast cancer: the effects of age, race, stage, and treatment. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1994;(16):69-77.

Swift M, Morrell D, Massey RB, Chase CL. Incidence of cancer in 161 families affected by ataxia-telangiectasia. N Engl J Med 1991 Dec 26;325(26):1831-6. Comments in: N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1357; discussion 1360-1; N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;3 26(20):1357-8; discussion 1360-1; N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1358; N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1358-9; discussion 1360-1; N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1359-61.

Teare MD, Wallace SA, Harris M, Howell A, Birch JM. Cancer experience in the relatives of an unselected series of breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 1994 Jul;70(1):102-11.

Thomas E, Cade J, Vail A. Risk factor analysis of data from assessment clinics in the UK breast screening programme: A case-control study in Portsmouth and Southampton. J Epidemiol Community Health 1996 Apr;50(2):144-8.

Tokunaga M, Land CE, Tokuoka S, Nishimori I, Soda M, Akiba S. Incidence of female breast cancer among atomic bomb survivors, 1950-1985. Radiat Res 1994 May;138(2):209-23.

Trends in screening mammograms for women 50 years of age and older--Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1987. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1989 Mar 10;38(9):137-40.

Vatten LJ, Bjerve KS, Andersen A, Jellum E. Polyunsaturated fatty acids in serum phospholipids and risk of breast cancer: a case-control study from the Janus serum bank in Norway. Eur J Cancer 1993;29A(4):532-8.

Wagner LK. Risk of breast cancer in ataxia-telangiectasia [letter]. N Engl J Med 1992 May 14;326(20):1358. Comment on: N Engl J Med 1991 Dec 26;325(26):1831-6.

Weiss HA, Brinton LA, Brogan D, Coates RJ, Gammon MD, Malone KE, Schoenberg JB, Swanson CA. Epidemiology of in situ and invasive breast cancer in women aged under 45. Br J Cancer 1996 May;73(10):1298-305.

Winchester DP, Menck HR, Osteen RT, Kraybill W. Treatment trends for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 1995 May;2(3):207-13.

Winchester DP, Osteen RT, Menck HR. The National Cancer Data Base report on breast carcinoma characteristics and outcome in relation to age. Cancer 1996 Oct 15;78(8):1838-43.

Zaloznik AJ. Breast cancer stage at diagnosis: Caucasians versus Afro-Americans. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995 Jun;34(3):195-8.

Return to table of contents

SUPPLEMENTAL REFERENCES

American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures, 1994. Atlanta (GA): The Society; 1994.

American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). Reston (VA): The College; 1993. 64 leaves.

Assembly of Life Sciences (US), Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations. The effects on populations of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation, 1980. Washington: National Academy Press; 1980. 524 p. (BEIR III).

Bassett LW. Quality determinants of mammography. Rockville (MD): Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (US); 1994. 170 p. (AHCPR publication; no. 95-0632); (Clinical practice guideline; 13). Available from: U.S. G.P.O., Washington, DC.

Bird RE. Low-cost screening mammography: report on finances and review of 21,716 consecutive cases. Radiology 1989 Apr;171(1):87-90.

Brenner BA. Whose cancer institute is it anyway? Breast Cancer Action Newsl 1996 Oct-Nov;(38):1-2, 10.

Brody JE, Holleb AI. You can fight cancer and win. New York: Quadrangle - The New York Times Book Co; 1977. 338 p.

Brown ML, Kessler LG, Rueter FG. Is the supply of mammography machines outstripping need and demand? An economic analysis. Ann Intern Med 1990 Oct 1;113(7):547-52. Comments in: Ann Intern Med 1990 Oct 1;113(7):489-90; Ann Intern Med 1990 Oct 1;113(7): 490-1.

Cady B, Stone MD, Wayne J. New therapeutic possibilities in primary invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg 1993 Sep;218(3):338-47; discussion 347-9. Comment in: Ann Surg 1995 Nov;222(5):687-8.

Campbell HS, McBean M, Mandin H, Bryant H. Teaching medical students how to perform a clinical breast examination. Acad Med 1994 Dec;69(12):993-5.

Day NE. Quantitative approaches to the evaluation of screening programs. World J Surg 1989 Jan-Feb;13(1):3-8.

Day NE, Miller AB, editors. Screening for breast cancer. 4th UICC Workshop on Screening for Cancer; 1986 Apr 7-9; Helsinki, Finland. Toronto: Huber; 1988. 124 p.

Day NE, Walter SD. Simplified models of screening for chronic disease: estimation procedures from mass screening programmes. Biometrics 1984 Mar;40(1):1-14.

de Waard F, Collette HJ, Rombach JJ, Baanders-van Halewijn EA, Honing C. The DOM project for the early detection of breast cancer, Utrecht, The Netherlands. J Chronic Dis 1984;37(1):1-44.

DeVita VT Jr, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA, editors. Important advances in oncology 1966. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1966.

Duffy SW, Chen HH, Tabar L, Day NE. Estimation of mean sojourn time in breast cancer screening using a Markov chain model of both entry to and exit from the preclinical detectable phase. Stat Med 1995 Jul 30;14(14):1531-43.

Dvoretsky PM, Woodard E, Bonfiglio TA, Hempelmann LH, Morse IP. The pathology of breast cancer in women irradiated for acute postpartum mastitis. Cancer 1980 Nov 15;46(10):2257-62.

Feig SA. Estimation of currently attainable benefit from mammographic screening of women aged 40-49 years. Cancer 1995 May 15;75(10):2412-9.

Garfinkel L, Ochs O, Mushinski M. Selection, followup and analysis in prospective studies; a workshop. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (US); 1985. 221 p. (National Cancer Institute monograph; 67); (NIH publication; no. 85-2713). Available fro m: U.S. G.P.O., Washington, DC.

Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, Morton DL, Evans SW, Krasne DL. Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 1995 Sep;222(3):394-9; discussion 399-401.

Henderson IC. Adjuvant systemic therapy for early breast cancer. Cancer 1994 Jul 1;74(1 Suppl):401-9.

Henson RM, Wyatt SW, Lee NC. The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: a comprehensive public health response to two major health issues for women. J Public Health Manage Pract 1996 Spring;2(2):36-47.

Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Ernster V. Benefit of mammography screening in women ages 40-49 years: current evidence from randomized controlled trials [letter]. Cancer 1995 Nov 1;76(9):1679-81.

King JM. Mammography screening for breast cancer [letter]. Cancer 1994 Apr 1;73(7):2003-6. Comment on: Cancer 1993 Sep 15;72(6):1809-12.

Kopans DB. Conventional wisdom: observation, experience, anecdote, and science in breast imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994 Feb;162(2):299-303. Comment in: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1994 Nov;163(5):1266.

Kopans DB. Detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast [letter]. JAMA 1996 Sep 18;276(11):869; discussion 870-71.

Kosary CL, et al., editors. Cancer statistics review 1973-92. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute (US); 1995. (NIH publication; no. 96-2789).

Lachin JM. Introduction to sample size determination and power analysis for clinical trials. Controlled Clin Trials 1981 Jun;2(2):93-113.

Lin PP, Allison DC, Wainstock J, Miller KD, Dooley WC, Friedman N, Baker RR. Impact of axillary lymph node dissection on the therapy of breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1993 Aug;11(8):1536-44.

Linver MN, Paster SB, Rosenberg RD, Key CR, Stidley CA, King WV. Improvement in mammography interpretation skills in a community radiology practice after dedicated teaching courses: 2-year medical audit of 38,633 cases. Radiology 1992 Jul;184(1):39-43. Published erratum appears in Radiology 1992 Sep;184(3):878.

Linver MN, Rosenberg RD, Smith RA. Mammography outcomes analysis: potential panacea or Pandora's box? AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996 Aug;167(2):373-5. Comment on: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1996 Aug;167(2):367-72.

Miller AB, Baines CJ, Sickles EA. Canadian National Breast Screening Study [letter]. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990 Nov;155(5):1133-4. Comment on: AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990 Oct;155(4):743-7; discussion 748-9.

Morris CR, Wright WE, editors. Breast cancer in California. Sacramento (CA): Cancer Surveillance Section, Cancer Control Branch; 1996. 141 p.

Moskowitz M. Breast cancer: age-specific growth rates and screening strategies. Radiology 1986 Oct;161(1):37-41.

National Institutes of Health (US), Ad Hoc Working Group to Develop Radioepidemiological Tables. Report of the National Institutes of Health Ad Hoc Working Group to Develop Radioepidemiological Tables: responding to the congressional mandate under sect ion 7(b) of the Orphan Drug Act of January 4, 1983 (PL 97-414). Bethesda (MD): The Institutes; 1985. 355 p. (NIH publication; no. 85-2748). Available from: U.S. G.P.O., Washington, DC.

National Research Council (US), Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation: BEIR V. Washington: National Academy Press; 1990. 421 p. (BEIR series; 5).

Paskett E, Rimer BK. Psychosocial effects of abnormal pap tests and mammograms: a review. J Womens Health 1995 Feb;4(1):73-82.

Poznanski AK, editor. Radiation protection in medicine. 28th Annual Meeting, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1992 Apr 1-2; Arlington, VA. Bethesda (MD): National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; 1993. 274 p. (Proceedings National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements; no. 14).

Roberts MM, Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Forrest AP, Hepburn W, Huggins A, Kirkpatrick AE, Lamb J, Lutz W, Muir BB. The Edinburgh randomised trial of screening for breast cancer: description of method. Br J Cancer 1984 Jul;50(1):1-6.

Robertson CL. A private breast imaging practice: medical audit of 25,788 screening and 1,077 diagnostic examinations. Radiology 1993 Apr;187(1):75-9.

Schnitt SJ, Harris JR, Smith BL. Developing a prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Are we there yet? [editorial]. Cancer 1996 Jun 1;77(11):2189-92. Comment on: Cancer 1996 Jun 1;77(11):2267-74.

Seidman H, Gelb SK, Silverberg E, LaVerda N, Lubera JA. Survival experience in the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. CA Cancer J Clin 1987 Sep-Oct;37(5):258-90.

Shapiro S. The call for change in breast cancer screening guidelines [editorial]. Am J Public Health 1994 Jan;84(1):10-1.

Shapiro S, et al. Periodic screening for breast cancer: the Health Insurance Plan project and its sequelae, 1963-1986. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1988. 214 p. (The Johns Hopkins series in contemporary medicine and public health).

Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L, Roeser R. Ten- to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst 1982 Aug;69(2):349-55.

Sickles EA, Kopans DB. Deficiencies in the analysis of breast cancer screening data [editorial]. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1621-4. Comment on: J Natl Cancer Inst 1993 Oct 20;85(20):1644-56. Comment in: J Natl Cancer Inst 1994 Apr 6;86(7): 558-61.

Sienko DG, Hahn RA, Mills EM, Yoon-DeLong V, Ciesielski CA, Williamson GD, Teutsch SM, Klenn PJ, Berkelman RL. Mammography use and outcomes in a community. The Greater Lansing Area Mammography Study. Cancer 1993 Mar 1;71(5):1801-9.

Silverstein MJ, Gierson ED, Waisman JR, Senofsky GM, Colburn WJ, Gamagami P. Axillary lymph node dissection for T1a breast carcinoma. Is it indicated? Cancer 1994 Feb 1;73(3):664-7.

Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Craig PH, Waisman JR, Lewinsky BS, Colburn WJ, Poller DN. A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 1996 Jun 1;77(11):2267-74. Comment in: Cancer 1996 Jun 1;77(11):2189-92.

Steele GD Jr, Jessup LM, Winchester DP, Murphy GP, Menck HR. Clinical highlights from the National Cancer Data Base: 1995. CA Cancer J Clin 1995 Mar-Apr;45(2):102-11.

Steele GD Jr, Osteen RT, Winchester DP, Murphy GP, Menck HR. Clinical highlights from the National Cancer Data Base: 1994. CA Cancer J Clin 1994 Mar-Apr;44(2):71-80. Comment in: CA Cancer J Clin 1995 Nov-Dec;45(6):375-6.

Steele GD Jr, Winchester DP, Menck HR, Murphy GP. Clinical highlights from the National Cancer Data Base: 1993. CA Cancer J Clin 1993 Mar-Apr;43(2):71-82.

Strax P. Early detection: breast cancer is curable. New York: Harper & Row; 1974. 105 p.

Thurfjell EL, Lindgren JA. Population-based mammography screening in Swedish clinical practice: prevalence and incidence screening in Uppsala County. Radiology 1994 Nov;193(2):351-7. Comment in: Radiology 1994 Nov;193(2):311-4.

Tokuoka S, Asano M, Yamamoto T, Tokunaga M, Sakamoto G, Hartmann WH, Hutter RV, Land CE, Henson DE. Histologic review of breast cancer cases in survivors of atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. Cancer 1984 Sep 1;54(5):849-54.

Trends in cancer screening--United States, 1987 and 1992. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1996 Jan 26;45(3):57-61.

United States Congress, House Committee on Governmental Operations. Misused science: the National Cancer Institute's elimination of mammography guidelines for women in their forties: sixteenth report by the Committee on Government Operations. Washingto n: U.S. G.P.O.; 1994.

Upton AC, Beebe GW, Brown JM, Quimby EH, Shellabarger C. Report of NCI Ad Hoc Working Group on the risks associated with mammography in mass screening for the detection of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1977 Aug;59(2):479-93.

Valdimarsdottir HB, Bovbjerg DH, Kash KM, Holland JC, Osborne MP, Miller DG. Psychological distress in women with a familial risk of breast cancer. Psycho Oncol 1995;4(2):133-41.

Winchester DP. Physical examination of the breast. Cancer 1992 Apr 1;69(7 Suppl):1947-9.

Wright CJ, Mueller CB. Screening mammography and public health policy: the need for perspective. Lancet 1995 Jul 1;346(8966):29-32. Comments in: Lancet 1995 Aug 12;346(8972):436-7; discussion 439; Lancet 1995 Aug 12;346(8972):437; discussion 439; Lancet 1995 Aug 12;346(8972):437-8; discussion 439; Lancet 1995 Aug 12;346(8972):438; discussion 439; Lancet 1995 Aug 12;346(8972.

Return to table of contents

Last updated: 01 April 2002
First published: 01 April 2002
Metadata| Permanence level: Permanent: Dynamic Content