Screening with Breast Cancer Mammography: Re-Evaluation of Current Evidence

Salameh, Jean‐Paul; Al-Ghita, Mohammed Kashif; McInnes, Matthew D. F.; Seely, Jean M.

doi:10.1177/08465371221148134

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Re-evaluate the evidence supporting the Cochrane review after excluding flawed trials and determine the strength of the evidence for breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years. 5…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editor’s Corner: August 2023

Chow

Patlas

2023

Can Assoc Radiol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Re-evaluate the evidence supporting the Cochrane review after excluding flawed trials and determine the strength of the evidence for breast cancer screening in women aged 40-49 years. 5…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Editor’s Corner: August 2023

Chow

Patlas

2023

Can Assoc Radiol J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Mammography (MAM) has been utilized as a gold-standard screening tool for BC in developed countries and has significantly decreased BC mortality, with a reduction of above 20% in women aged 50–69 and about 30% in women aged ≥ 70, respectively [ 5 ]. Nevertheless, it lacks meaningful benefits in women aged 40–49 and shows reduced accuracy in dense breasts, which not only could mask an underlying tumor on mammogram, but is also an independent risk factor of BC [ 6 , 7 ]. Furthermore, MAM is not readily available in under-resource settings because of the high cost and healthcare personnel shortage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasound for Breast Cancer Screening in Resource-Limited Settings: Current Practice and Future Directions

Dan

Zheng

Liu

et al. 2023

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast cancer (BC) is the most prevalent cancer among women globally. Cancer screening can reduce mortality and improve women’s health. In developed countries, mammography (MAM) has been primarily utilized for population-based BC screening for several decades. However, it is usually unavailable in low-resource settings due to the lack of equipment, personnel, and time necessary to conduct and interpret the examinations. Ultrasound (US) with high detection sensitivity for women of younger ages and with dense breasts has become a supplement to MAM for breast examination. Some guidelines suggest using US as the primary screening tool in certain settings where MAM is unavailable and infeasible, but global recommendations have not yet reached a unanimous consensus. With the development of smart devices and artificial intelligence (AI) in medical imaging, clinical applications and preclinical studies have shown the potential of US combined with AI in BC screening. Nevertheless, there are few comprehensive reviews focused on the role of US in screening BC in underserved conditions, especially in technological, economical, and global perspectives. This work presents the benefits, limitations, advances, and future directions of BC screening with technology-assisted and resource-appropriate strategies, which may be helpful to implement screening initiatives in resource-limited countries.

show abstract