Greg Freiherr, Industry Consultant

Greg Freiherr has reported on developments in radiology since 1983. He runs the consulting service, The Freiherr Group.

Blog | Greg Freiherr, Industry Consultant | December 15, 2011

Mammography’s Looming Dose War

By Greg Freiherr

As the dose wars in computed tomography (CT) draw to a close, a new one approaches, this one in mammography. The surprise should not be that this war is coming, but that it is taking so long to get here.

Mammography is the only imaging exam widely performed to screen apparently healthy people. It exposes them to ionizing radiation that, if administered in substantial quantities, can cause the very disease for which they are being screened. And it does so not once or twice, but annually for 30 or more years, per guidelines developed by the American Cancer Society (http://www.cancer.org/Healthy/FindCancerEarly/CancerScreeningGuidelines/american-cancer-society-guidelines-for-the-early-detection-of-cancer), with the understanding that the risk of cancer from radiation exposure increases with cumulative dose.

Yet, in the past, when questions about the benefit of such repetitive screening were raised, they were immediately and soundly rebuked by women’s health leaders who defended screening as a major, if not the primary, reason for declining deaths due to breast cancer.  Then why now do I believe dose will become an issue? Because the technology to reduce dose is finally available in the United States  – and being aggressively marketed on its ability to significantly cut patient radiation dose.

This product – Philips’ Microdose mammography product – like so much about mammography and radiation dose, is steeped in irony. It is not new.  It has been sold for years in Europe. But Microdose entered the U.S. only this fall after Philips Healthcare acquired Sectra’s mammography modality business operations.

Three months after this deal was final, during the RSNA annual meeting in November, the ability of this product to cut patient radiation dose was ballyhooed on the exhibit floor of the McCormick Center, on television, even on the sides of buses ferrying radiologists to and from the meeting. The message was inescapable. And it will become so again in the year ahead.

Much like what happened in CT, all the vendors of mammography equipment will have to climb onboard this bandwagon and they will have to do so quickly. They cannot cede the high ground of digital mammography to newcomer Philips, nor can they risk appearing unsympathetic to concerns about radiation dose, when tens of millions of American women undergo mammography every year.

With this, we can expect a new vernacular for the modality, one reliant on the use of “low,” “optimized,” “minimum” and “efficient” as  descriptors of dose administered by mammography equipment. Vendors will use several, possibly all, these descriptors in the same paragraph, if not the same sentence to define their products.

When that happens, it will be a sure sign that this new war has begun.

Related Content

ACOs, MSSP, Medicare Shared Savings Program, screening mammography use study, Radiology journal
News | Mammography | September 28, 2016
The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) has produced small but significant improvements in mammography utilization...
Spanish, breast health, breast density, DenseBreast-info.org
News | Breast Density | September 28, 2016
September 28, 2016 – Addressing the educational needs of an underserved and growing population, DenseBreast-info.org
ASTRO, ASCO, SSO, guideline update, post-mastectomy radiotherapy, PMRT, radiation therapy
News | Radiation Therapy | September 23, 2016
September 23, 2016 — Three leading national cancer organizations issued a joint clinical practice guideline update fo
PET probes, breast cancer, surface receptor changes, MGH study, Memorial Sloan Kettering

After molecularly targeted therapy with an AKT inhibitor, the receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) HER3 increases in this particular tumor, but the RTK EGFR does not. In this example, starting HER3 inhibitor therapy in addition to AKT inhibitor therapy is likely to be beneficial, but the addition of EGFR inhibitor therapy is not likely to be beneficial for treating this tumor. Image courtesy of Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

News | Nuclear Imaging | September 20, 2016
September 20, 2016 — Cancer biologists know that inhibitor-mediated feedback loop changes (increased expression of a
PACSHealth, NCI, National Cancer Institute, DoseMonitor, NCICT, CT radiation dose monitoring
News | Radiation Dose Management | September 20, 2016
PACSHealth LLC announced that its DoseMonitor application will be the first software application to incorporate the...
Digital Mammography DREAM Challenge, open-source competition, accuracy
News | Mammography | September 15, 2016
A coalition of oncology and technology partners led by Sage Bionetworks and DREAM Challenges last week announced the...
Philips, Medic Vision, SafeCT-29, XR-29 compliance, RSNA 2016
News | Radiation Dose Management | September 14, 2016
Medic Vision Imaging Solutions Ltd. announced last week that its vendor-independent, low-dose computed tomography (CT)...
News | Breast Density | September 13, 2016
September 13, 2016 — Are You Dense Inc., in collaboration with Madre Latina Inc., recently announced a new set of edu
UCLA study, Oncotype Dx DCIS test, breast cancer, cost-effectiveness
News | Women's Health | September 13, 2016
A new study by a University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) researcher has found that a genomic test widely used to...
mammography

MD Buyline Mammography Market Activity

Feature | Women's Health | September 07, 2016 | By Rachael Bennett, BHS, R.T.(R)(T) and Julie Johnson
Before the introduction of 3-D digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging, 2-D full field digital mammography (FFDM)...
Overlay Init