The Mammography Debate: To Screen or Not to Screen?

In a much-tweeted cover story for the New York Times Magazine, Peggy Orenstein recently wrote that she once believed a mammogram saved her life. Sixteen years later, after dealing with breast cancer round two, she says she now wonders whether that first mammogram mattered at all. “Would the outcome have been the same,” she writes in Our Feel-Good War on Breast Cancer, “had I bumped into the cancer on my own years later?”

Researchers have asked this same question for many years now. Following hundreds of thousands of women over long periods of time, randomized clinical trials have found that very few women have their lives saved by routine mammogram screenings. Instead, women who have regular screenings are more likely to experience unnecessary treatment (such as biopsies, surgeries, and drugs for benign conditions or risk factors that were not themselves life-threatening). A leading source of health-care analysis, the Cochrane Collaboration, analyzed clinical studies and found that “for every 2,000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will have her life prolonged,” and “10 healthy women … will be treated unnecessarily.”

Unless we have high odds for winning the lottery, probabilities are not something most of us want to hear. We’ve been told for years that finding breast cancer “early” increases a person’s chances of not dying from the disease, and that mammograms are the gold standard for finding breast cancer early.

The problem is that some breast cancers don’t show up well on mammograms, or at all; some cancers, even though they may be small, have already spread throughout the body; and some of the most aggressive types of breast cancer show up between mammograms. In the end, “early” may not be early enough in determining prognosis. Researchers have identified at least ten molecular types of breast cancer, each associated with different prognoses. Because of cancer’s complexity, the limitations of x-rays and computer-aided technologies, as well as differences in expertise among radiologists and diagnostic centers, screening has helped to reduce the death rate by only about 15 percent. Some studies put the screening-associated reduction as low as two percent.

A typical response to concerns over the limitations and risks of routine screening is to observe that “mammograms are not perfect.” In reality, costly programs of regular screening result in under-diagnosing some people and over-diagnosing others — as much as 30 percent of women who get regular mammograms experience over-diagnosis and the treatments that go along with it. The net effect: Fewer lives are being saved than anticipated and more people harmed. With such high rates of over-diagnosis and over-treatment, questions are growing about just who really ought to be screened, and how often.

There is no doubt about the importance of mammograms as a diagnostic tool — that is, as a test for women who have symptoms of a problem. But there is mounting support for the 2009 United States Preventive Services Task Force recommendation of fewer screenings for most women (every other year from age 50 to 75). Still, in the midst of shifting protocols, what is a woman of average risk to do?

Well, here is what I do. I remind myself that screening mammography is an option with risks, not an imperative. I look for balanced information about the benefits and harms of routine screening. I avoid health messages on pink products. I ask my doctor, “What do you think you will learn from that test, and what will we do with the information?” And I urge researchers and other experts in the public health sector to take women’s concerns seriously, to acknowledge the harms associated with screening, and instead of just telling us what to do, to take steps to address these issues so we’re not having still this conversation in another 30 years. Rather than spending billions on advertising campaigns to convince women to “just do it” and get mammograms, I’d rather see those funds go to treatments against the most deadly metastatic breast cancer and efforts to stop the disease before it starts.


logo-sharecare.pngOriginally Published on ShareCare.com

May 20, 2013


To help you weigh the pros and cons of mammography screening, the Harding Center for Risk Literacy prepared a facts box with neutral and easy-to-understand information about the harms and benefits. The numbers refer to 2,000 women over 50 years of age who participated in the screening for 10 years (screening group), compared to 2,000 women of the same age who did not participate in the screening during the same time period (control group).

factsbox_mammographie_06-2012

The facts box shows that mammography screening reduced the number of deaths through breast cancer from 8 to 7 in 2,000 women. This effect had no influence on all-cancer mortality: The number of women who died of any cancer was the same in both groups. However, 200 of 2,000 women in the screening group had at least one suspicious screening result within the 10 years, though it later proved to be a false alarm.

Mammography screening also detects so-called “indolent” (slowly growing or less aggressive) tumors, which would never develop into a life-threatening disease. But because their development cannot be predicted, about 10 of 2,000 women in the screening group had their breast completely or partially removed.


Be Sociable, Share!

“Pink Ribbon Blues”

Paperback includes a new Introduction on fundraising controversies and a color insert with images of, and reactions to, the pinking of breast cancer (2012).


Praise » 

Flyer »

Press Release »

Hardback Cover »

Paperback Cover »

Request Review Copies »

Order the Paperback »

* GAYLE IN THE MEDIA *

"Seeing clearly through the pink haze" Toronto Sun

*Sad face*: Being happy does not help you live longer" New Scientist

How should we address breast cancer when norms continually change? The Guardian

Your Fun 'No Bra Day' Photos Are Overshadowing Terminal Breast Cancer Patients Broadly

Backlash against “pinkwashing” of breast cancer awareness campaigns BMJ

Breast Cancer to Rise 50 Percent by 2030? Hey, Not So Fast! Health News Review

Breast Cancer: The Flaws in the Cause iafrica.com

How to Make the Biggest Impact With Your Breast Cancer Donations Money

The Very Pink, Very Controversial Business of Breast Cancer Awareness Racked

NFL, Pink Ribbons Not Enough to Win over Women CNN

3 Questions We Need to Answer for Breast Cancer Awareness Month Chronicle of Philanthropy

The problem with National Breast Cancer Awareness Month Women's Health Magazine

Pink Ribbon Envy: Living with an Uncool Cancer The Nib

A Year After Bombings, Some Say 'Boston Strong' Has Gone Overboard NPR, All Things Considered

Canadian Mammogram Study KCRW, NPR Affiliate

Time to Debunk the Mammography Myth CNN

Breast Cancer: Awareness, Activism & Pinkwashing NPR Charlotte

Buying Pink Al Jazeera's The Stream Watch »

The Pink Backlash Orlando Sentinel

Why Jolie's Test Costs So Much CNN

Preventative Mastectomies: Disease and Deception BlogTalkRadio

Angelina Jolie and the 'Breast Cancer Gene' KCRW

Our Feel-Good War on Breast Cancer The New York Times Magazine.

The Story Behind the Pink Ribbon Campaign Sisters Talk Radio

WISH Interview Women's International Summit for Health

Making Cancer About The Patient, Not The Body Part CBS Pittsburgh

Sexy breast cancer campaigns anger many patients USA Today

The perils of pink The Daily

Komen pink campaign creates breast-cancer blues for some Dallas Morning News

A yellow flag for the NFL's pink New York Daily

Gayle Sulik named #7 in SharecareNow’s Top 10 Online Influencers in Breast Cancer

Breast cancer cancer causes so easily derailed Philly Inquirer

Komen Charity Under Microscope for Funding, Science Reuters

The Fight Against Cancer - And Abortion? Salon.com

Susan G. Komen For the Cure defunds Planned Parenthood. In Deep with Angie Coiro

Amid Breast Cancer Month, Is there Pink Fatigue? NPR's All Things Considered

How is Breast Cancer Culture Undermining Women's Health? America’s Radio News Network

Pink Ribbon Culture and Breast Cancer The Kojo Nnamdi Show

The Big Business of Breast Cancer
Marie Claire

Does Breast Cancer Awareness Month Crowd Out Other Diseases? Slate

Pink Inc. Has Many Starting to See Red The Sacramento Bee

Get Your Pink Off Ottawa Citizen

Komen Pink Ribbons Raise Green and Questions USA Today

** MORE MEDIA LINKS **
** MORE RADIO INTERVIEWS **