Breast neoplasms; Diagnosis; Breast radiography; Cancer screening
Résumé :
[en] The literature on screening mammography provides ample opportunity for doubt (the sceptics) and dogma (the screening zealots), and can be interpreted to prove both benefit and harm. The benefit of mammography screening, if any, is modest and the balance between beneficial (potentially, a 20% relative reduction in breast cancer mortality with no significant benefit on all-cause mortality) and harmful (physical and psychological morbidity related to the 15-40% missed cancers and the 80-90% false-positive diagnoses) effects is still delicate. The mammogram alone is a modest weapon. Concurrent clinical breast examination is mandatory. Women that are concerned about breast cancer should be fully informed of the potential benefits and risks of screening mammography. These women should benefit from mammography with concurrent clinical breast examination, and possible whole-breast ultrasound in heterogeneously dense and extremely dense breast patterns.
Disciplines :
Médecine de la reproduction (Gynécologie, andrologie, obstétrique)
Auteur, co-auteur :
Lifrange, Eric ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Sénologie
Bleret, Valerie ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Sénologie
Desreux, Joëlle ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Sénologie
Dondelinger, Robert ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Radiologie - Imagerie médicale
Foidart, Jean-Michel ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Gynécologie - Obstétrique
Gaspard, Ulysse ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Services généraux (Faculté de médecine) > Relations académiques et scientifiques (Médecine)
Herman, Philippe ; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège - CHU > Sénologie - Gynécologie-Obstétrique
Van Cauwenberge, Jean-Rémy ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Département des sciences cliniques > Gynécologie-Obstétrique-Sénologie
Colin, Claude ; Université de Liège - ULiège > Gynécologie - Obstétrique
Langue du document :
Français
Titre :
Interet et limites du depistage de masse du cancer du sein par mammographie seule (mammotest)
Skrabanek P. - False premises and false promises of breast cancer screening. Lancet, 1985, ii, 316-320.
Nyström L, Rutqvist LE, Walls S et al. - Breast cancer screening with mammography: overview of Swedish randomised trials. Lancet, 1993, 341, 973-978.
Baum M. - Screening for breast cancer, time to think and stop? Lancet, 1995, 346, 436-439.
Wright CJ, Mueller CB. - Screening mammography and public health policy: the need for perspective. Lancet, 1995, 346, 29-32.
Baum M. - The breast screening controversy. Eur J Cancer, 1996, 32, 9-11.
Baum M. - Screening mammography re-evaluated. Lancet, 2000, 355, 751.
Gotzsche PC, Olsen O. - Is screening for breast cancer with mammography justifiable? Lancet, 2000, 355, 129-134.
Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, Wall C. - Canadian national breast screening study-2: 13-year results of a randomized trial in women aged 50-59 years. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2000, 92, 1490-1499.
Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, et al. - The Swedish two-county trial twenty years later: up-dated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am, 2000, 38, 625-651.
Olsen O, Gotzsche PC. - Cochrane review on screening for breast cancer with mammography. Lancet, 2001, 358, 1340-1342.
Horton R. - Screening mammography - an overview revisited. Lancet, 2001, 358, 1284-1285.
Baltic S. - Analysis of mammography trials renews debate on mortality reduction. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2001, 93, 1678-1679.
Juff HG, Tannock IF. - Screening trials are even more difficult than we thought they were. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2002, 94, 156-157.
Nystrom L, Andersson I, Bjurstam N, et al. - Longterm effects of mammography screening: updated overview of the Swedish randomised trials. Lancet, 2002, 359, 909-919.
Miller AB, To T, Baines CJ, et al. - The Canadian National Breast Screening Study-1: breast cancer mortality after 11 to 16 years of follow-up. Ann Intern Med, 2002, 137, 305-312.
Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BKS, et al. - Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. preventive services task force. Ann Intern Med, 2002, 137, 347-360.
Goodman SN. - The mammography dilemma: a crisis for evidence-based medecine? Ann Intern Med, 2002, 137, 363-365.
Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. - Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations. N Engl J Med, 1998, 338, 1089-1096.
Peer PGM, Verbeek ALM, Straatman H, et al. - Age-specific sensitivities of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 1996, 38, 153-160.
van Gils CH, Otten JD, Hendriks JH et al. - High mammographic breast density and its implications for early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen, 1999, 6, 200-204.
Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. - Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2000, 92, 1081-108.
Barratt A, Cockburn J, Furnival C et al. - Perceived sensitivity of mammographic screening: women's views on test accuracy and financial compensation for missed cancers. J Epidemiol Community Health, 1999, 53, 716-720.
Berlin L. - The missed breast cancer: perceptions and realities. AJR, 1999, 173, 1161-1167.
Early breast cancer trialists' collaborative group. - Systematic treatment of early breast cancer by hormonal, cytotoxic, or immune therapy: 133 randomised trials involving 31.000 recurrences and 24.000 deaths among 75.000 women. Lancet, 1992, 339, 1-15, 71-85.
Sjönell G, Ståhle L. - Hålsokontroller med mammografi minskar inte dödlighet i bröstcancer. Läkartidningen, 1999, 96, 904-913.
Seradour B, Esteve J, Heid P, et al. - Hormone replacement therapy and screening mammography: analysis of the results in the Bouches du Rhone programme. J Med Screen, 1999, 6, 99-102.
Kavanagh AM, Mitchell H, Giles GG. - Hormone replacement therapy and accuracy of mammographic screening. Lancet, 2000, 355, 270-274.
Kavanagh AM, Giles GG, Mitchell H, et al. - The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of screening mammography and symptomatic status. J Med Screen, 2000, 7, 105-110.
Paquette D, Snider J, Bouchard F, et al. - Performance of screening mammography in organized programs in Canada in 1996. The database management subcommittee to the national committee for the Canadian breast cancer screening initiative. CMAJ, 2000, 163, 1135-1138.
Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ, et al. - Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. AJR, 2001, 177, 543-549.
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. - Occult cancer in women with dense breast: detection with screening US, diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology, 1998, 207, 191-199.
Sox H. - Screening mammography for younger women: back to basics. Ann Intern Med, 2002, 137, 361-362.
Buchberger W, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Springer P, et al. - Incidental findings on sonography of the breast: clinical significance and diagnostic workup. AJR, 1999, 173, 921-927.
Kaplan SS. - Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology, 2001, 221, 641-649.
Saarenmaa I, Salminen T, Geiger U, et al. - The effect of age and density of the breast on the sensitivity of breast cancer diagnostic by mammography and ultrasonography. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2001, 67, 117-123.
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. - Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology, 2002, 225, 165-175.
