Title |
ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening
|
---|---|
Published in |
Journal of the American College of Radiology, November 2016
|
DOI | 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.09.021 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Martha B. Mainiero, Ana Lourenco, Mary C. Mahoney, Mary S. Newell, Lisa Bailey, Lora D. Barke, Carl D’Orsi, Jennifer A. Harvey, Mary K. Hayes, Phan Tuong Huynh, Peter M. Jokich, Su-Ju Lee, Constance D. Lehman, David A. Mankoff, Joshua A. Nepute, Samir B. Patel, Handel E. Reynolds, M. Linda Sutherland, Bruce G. Haffty |
Abstract |
Mammography is the recommended method for breast cancer screening of women in the general population. However, mammography alone does not perform as well as mammography plus supplemental screening in high-risk women. Therefore, supplemental screening with MRI or ultrasound is recommended in selected high-risk populations. Screening breast MRI is recommended in women at high risk for breast cancer on the basis of family history or genetic predisposition. Ultrasound is an option for those high-risk women who cannot undergo MRI. Recent literature also supports the use of breast MRI in some women of intermediate risk, and ultrasound may be an option for intermediate-risk women with dense breasts. There is insufficient evidence to support the use of other imaging modalities, such as thermography, breast-specific gamma imaging, positron emission mammography, and optical imaging, for breast cancer screening. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed every 2 years by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and review includes an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of a well-established consensus methodology (modified Delphi) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures by the panel. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or not definitive, expert opinion may be used to recommend imaging or treatment. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Argentina | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Canada | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 110 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
Other | 9 | 8% |
Researcher | 9 | 8% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 8% |
Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
Other | 29 | 26% |
Unknown | 31 | 28% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 31% |
Engineering | 8 | 7% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 3% |
Other | 16 | 14% |
Unknown | 39 | 35% |