Mammogram warns against cancer

Mammogram warns against cancer.


Often-conflicting results from studies on the value of unimaginative mammography have only fueled the meditate about how often women should get a mammogram and at what age they should start. In a new critique of previous research, experts have applied the same statistical yardstick to four large studies and re-examined the results. They found that the benefits are more in concordance across the large studies than previously thought mxit id bbm pins whatsapp numbers south africa horny girls 2015. All the studies showed a major reduction in breast cancer deaths with mammography screening.



So "Women should be reassured that mammography is honestly effective," said study researcher Robert Smith, senior guide of cancer screening for the American Cancer Society. Smith is scheduled to present the findings this week at the 2013 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium natural-breast-success.top. The findings also were published in the November question of the minutes Breast Cancer Management.



In 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), an self-governing group of national experts, updated its recommendation on mammography, advising women venerable 50 to 74 to get mammograms every two years, not annually.The group also advised women age-old 40 to 49 to talk to their doctors about benefits and harms, and decide on an distinctive basis whether to start screening. Other organizations, including the American Cancer Society, with to recommend annual screening mammograms beginning at age 40.



In assessing mammography's benefits and harms, researchers often overlook at the number of women who must be screened to prevent one death from breast cancer - a thousand that has ranged widely among studies. In assessing harms, experts be into account the possibility of false positives. Other possible harms include finding a cancer that would not otherwise have been found on screening (and not been hairy in a woman's lifetime) and anxiety associated with additional testing.



Smith's band looked at four large, well-known reviews of the benefit of mammography. These included the Nordic Cochrane review, the UK Independent Breast Screening Review, the USPSTF weigh and the European Screening Network review. To regiment the estimates of how many women need to be screened to hamper one breast cancer death, the researchers applied the data from each of the four reviews to the scenario occupied in the UK study.



Before this standardized review, the number of women who must be screened to prevent one death ranged from 111 to 2000 to each the studies. Smith's team found that estimates of the benefits and harms were all based on unconventional situations. Different age groups were being screened, for instance, and different follow-up periods were used. Some studies looked at the tot of women for whom screening is offered and others looked at the horde who actually got mammograms. There often is a huge difference between those two groups.



So "Thirty to 40 percent don't show up, and they are counted as having a mammogram although they did not when they croak of breast cancer. This hugely depresses the benefits. If you don't have a big follow-up, you are not able to accurately measure the benefit. Some women ache 20 or more years after the diagnosis". After the researchers used a single, low-grade scenario, the gap in benefit estimates among studies dropped substantially - ranging from 64 to 257 women who must be screened to interdict a single death from breast cancer.



Dr Michael LeFevre, co-vice chairman of the USPSTF, reviewed the revitalized findings but was not involved in the study. "For women ancient 50 to 69, it confirms that mammography can reduce deaths from teat cancer. The new analysis doesn't include women in their 40s, which is one of the central parts of the ceaseless debate about the use of screening mammography. The task force is in the process of updating the 2009 guidance who is also a professor of family and community medicine at the University of Missouri. "The update is not in rejoinder to the re-analysis more information. It's standard timing for an update".

tag : cancer women breast screening mammography studies harms screened benefits

Post a comment

Private comment

No title

Does your site have a contact page? I'm having a tough time locating it but,
I'd like to shoot you an email. I've got some ideas for your
blog you might be interested in hearing. Either way, great website and I look
forward to seeing it develop over time.
Профиль

alejandrafalto

Author:alejandrafalto
Dr. Alejandra Falto

Новые записи
Новые комментарии
Новые трэкбэки
Архив по месяцам
Категории
Форма поиска
RSS ссылка
Ссылки
Формуляр приглашения в блог-друзья

Добавить автора в блог-друзья