mammography

"That was my last mammogram with this dude. Or any dude," the comedian wrote in a searing Instagram post.
There are multiple occasions when I discover just the perfect top only to be disappointed that its one size fits all did
Until the breast screening community embraces tailored screening for women with dense breast tissue to reduce risk of advanced disease, preventable fatalities will continue.
I count my blessings that my husband's vow, in sickness and in health, has withstood the caregiver challenge he promised to me nearly forty-two years ago.
Being the architect of legislation to include a patient's dense breast tissue, the strongest predictor of mammography missing
Connecticut radiologists, once in opposition to density reporting laws, have demonstrated through its data in clinical settings what has been in the literature for more than two decades.
Twelve minutes later the technician returned. The calcifications were not obviously malignant nor were they obviously benign, they were somewhere in the middle, not close enough to bad to require a biopsy at this time. I was to come back in six months for more tests to see if there was any change. I was told this was good news for today.
Like forecasting, breast cancer screening and diagnosis aren't perfect -- especially in younger women. But that alone shouldn't lead us to stop using them. I, for one, would hate to get caught unaware in that storm.
A woman cannot participate in shared decision making about her values and preferences of screening without weighing the pros and cons of over-diagnosis, false positives and missed positives.
After decades of educating the public about the importance of early detection, the new guidelines are indeed confusing and controversial. In the new guidelines, the recommended age for annual screening mammography was increased from age 40 to age 45 for women "of average risk for breast cancer."
These new recommendations will be surely be controversial. Experts will debate the epidemiological evidence of whether early and more frequent screening save lives. But the real controversy won't be among those experts and it won't be about the facts.
While mammograms may not yet be perfect, screening continues to be important.
The assumption that we can accurately identify who is just at average risk of breast cancer is a dangerous default. Risk is complex, poorly understood, and it's often inconsistently assessed over time.
Welcome to the world of studying low probability events. When the risk is high, the study can be small. But when the risk is low, the study needs to be big -- and long.
We need to refocus our resources and attention on the two things that really matter: (1) stopping men and women from getting breast cancer in the first place -- primary prevention; and (2) preventing metastasis if they do.
Since the shock of my advanced-stage breast cancer diagnosis in 2004, I have relentlessly focused on empowering women with information about the strongest predictor of mammography missing cancer: dense breast tissue.
Instead of going into something blindfolded, you are able to physically and mentally prepare yourself, be strong, and hope for the best outcome. Knowledge is power.
Mammograms have gotten better at detecting tumors in the earliest stages -- so much so that, in some cases, they are detecting