Feature | Breast Imaging | April 18, 2019 | By Greg Freiherr

How Risk Stratification Might Affect Women’s Health

Various factors should be considered when planning to screen for breast cancer

Fatty tissue and breast density may be considered in the context of many factors that affect the occurrence and detection of breast cancer

Fatty tissue and breast density may be considered in the context of many factors that affect the occurrence and detection of breast cancer. Permission to publish provided by DenseBreast-info.org

When planning a screening program to detect the early signs of breast cancer, age is a major consideration. But it should not be the only one, said Diana Miglioretti, Ph.D., a biostatistics professor at the University of California, Davis.

In an April 5 presentation at the Society for Breast Imaging (SBI)/American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Symposium in Hollywood, Fla., Miglioretti noted that several factors can strongly affect the development of breast cancer. If women are to be accurately stratified by risk, these factors should be considered, she said.

One of them is age. The biostatistics professor explained how age can influence the risk of breast cancer (the vast majority of breast cancers occur in women older than age 50, according to the breast cancer surveillance consortium, abbreviated as BCSC) — and what it means for screening with FFDM (full-field digital mammography) and DBT (digital breast mammography).

 

How Individual Women Can Calculate Risk

Much of the risk of developing breast cancer depends on multiple factors, which is why BCSC has come up with a breast cancer risk calculator. Miglioretti highlighted this calculator in her symposium presentation. The free-of-charge calculator is available on the web or as an iPhone-compatible app that can be downloaded. It calculates and compares a woman’s risk of cancer to that of the average woman.

“So if a woman has twice the average risk, she might consider more aggressive screening or start screening early,” Miglioretti said.

The calculator considers a woman’s:

  • Age (the risk of developing breast cancer increases with advancing age, according to the BCSC);
  • race and ethnicity (calibrated by BCSC for non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Native American/Native Alaskan, and Hispanic women);
  • family history of breast cancer, marked by first-degree relatives — such as mother, sisters and daughters — who have had breast cancer;
  • history of breast biopsy (BCSC noted that risk especially increases if past biopsy specimens showed atypical ductal hyperplasia, a noncancerous condition in which the number of ductal cells increases or these cells look abnormal, or lobular carcinoma in situ, a noninvasive condition characterized by abnormal cells in breast lobules); and
  • breast density, which is determined by the relative amounts of fat, epithelial, and connective tissues that appear differently on mammograms due to X-ray attenuation, according to BCSC.

 

Why Considering Multiple Factors Makes Sense

Miglioretti noted that risk assessment is critically important to coming up with a personalized approach to screening, which she strongly advocates. The biggest benefit from breast cancer screening is early detection, she said, because when breast cancer is detected early, “you have more of a chance to prevent death and morbidity.“

But the chance of physical and psychological harm from screening should be considered. Either or both may result from false-positives, she said, noting that physical harm may come from unneeded chemotherapy or surgery. Psychological harm may occur when a woman thinks she has cancer but doesn’t, Miglioretti said.

The development of a personalized screening approach contrasts sharply with current guidelines, which rely heavily on a single factor, age. At least one guideline recommends that screening begin at age 50; others advise the start of screening much younger — one as early as age 40 (the American Cancer Society Guidelines for the Early Detection of Cancer.)

“But there are women in their 50s who are at lower risk than someone in their 40s,” she said. “Using a risk-based approach would actually identify more women with potential benefit from screening than using just age.”

Current guidelines may seem inconsistent because they recommend that screening start at different ages, Miglioretti said. But all guidelines say that women in their 40s should use personal choice to decide whether screening is right for them, she said: “We should empower women to make these decisions for themselves.”

Women, Miglioretti emphasized, should be encouraged to make their own choices about when to start screening and how aggressively to do so (whether annually or biannually, for example). Their decisions should be based on how they value the benefits versus harms, although some patients, she noted, may want to defer to their physicians.

“And that is fine as well,” she said. “Either way, it is the patient’s choice.”

 

Greg Freiherr is a contributing editor to Imaging Technology News (ITN). Over the past three decades, he has served as business and technology editor for publications in medical imaging, as well as consulted for vendors, professional organizations, academia, and financial institutions.

Related content:

VIDEO: Age, Interval and Other Considerations for Breast Screening

BOOK: Breast Cancer Screening: Making Sense of Complex and Evolving Evidence

 Individual and Combined Effects of Age, Breast Density, and Hormone Replacement Therapy Use on the Accuracy of Screening Mammography

Risk Stratification for Screening Mammography: Benefits and Harms

VIDEO: A Discussion on Proposed FDA Rules for Mammography Reporting

FDA Proposes New Rules for Mammography Reporting and Quality Improvement

Related Content

VolparaDensity With Tyrer-Cuzick Model Improves Breast Cancer Risk Stratification
News | Breast Density | May 22, 2019
Research has demonstrated use of Volpara Solutions' VolparaDensity software in combination with the Tyrer-Cuzick Breast...
Partial Breast Irradiation Effective, Convenient Treatment Option for Low-Risk Breast Cancer
News | Radiation Therapy | May 20, 2019
Partial breast irradiation produces similar long-term survival rates and risk for recurrence compared with whole breast...
Managing Architectural Distortion on Mammography Based on MR Enhancement
News | Mammography | May 15, 2019
High negative predictive values (NPV) in mammography architectural distortion (AD) without ultrasonographic (US)...
Screening MRI Detects BI-RADS 3 Breast Cancer in High-risk Patients
News | MRI Breast | May 09, 2019
When appropriate, short-interval follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be used to identify early-stage breast...
Novel Artificial Intelligence Method Predicts Future Risk of Breast Cancer
News | Artificial Intelligence | May 08, 2019
Researchers from two major institutions have developed a new tool with advanced artificial intelligence (AI) methods to...
Georgia Becomes 38th State With Breast Density Inform Law
News | Breast Density | May 06, 2019
Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed breast density inform bill HB62 into law May 3, 2019. The law, which becomes effective...
American Society of Breast Surgeons Issues Risk-based Screening Mammography Guidelines
News | Mammography | May 03, 2019
The American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) has released the first screening mammography guidelines based on a...
Hologic Launches Trident HD Specimen Radiography System
Technology | Breast Biopsy Systems | April 26, 2019
Hologic Inc. announced global commercial availability of the Trident HD specimen radiography system. The next-...
California Protons Cancer Therapy Center Begins Breast Cancer Study Enrollment
News | Proton Therapy | April 25, 2019
California Protons Cancer Therapy Center announced two major efforts representing significant steps forward in breast...
Women With Coronary Artery Wall Thickness at Risk for Heart Disease
News | Cardiac Imaging | April 25, 2019
The thickness of the coronary artery wall as measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an independent marker for...