SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Smith RA, Mettlin CJ, Davis KJ, Eyre H. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2000; 50: 3449.
  • 2
    Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003; 53: 141169.
  • 3
    Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007; 57: 7589.
  • 4
    Smith RA, Cokkinides V, von Eschenbach AC, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2002; 52: 822.
  • 5
    Saslow D, Castle PE, Cox JT, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine use to prevent cervical cancer and its precursors. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007; 57: 728.
  • 6
    Smith RA, von Eschenbach AC, Wender R, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for the early detection of cancer: update of early detection guidelines for prostate, colorectal, and endometrial cancers. Also: update 2001—testing for early lung cancer detection. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001; 51: 3875; quiz 77–80.
  • 7
    Levin B, Brooks D, Smith RA, Stone A. Emerging technologies in screening for colorectal cancer: CT colonography, immunochemical fecal occult blood tests, and stool screening using molecular markers. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003; 53: 4455.
  • 8
    Rex DK, Kahi CJ, Levin B, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after cancer resection: a consensus update by the American Cancer Society and US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006; 56: 160167; quiz 85–86.
  • 9
    Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Fletcher RH, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after polypectomy: a consensus update by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American Cancer Society. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006; 56: 143159; quiz 84–85.
  • 10
    Levin B, Lieberman DA, McFarland B, et al. Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008; 58: 130160.
  • 11
    Wolf A, Wender R, Etzioni R, et al; American Cancer Society Prostate Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society Guideline for the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer: Update 2010. CA Cancer J Clin 2010; 60:In press.
  • 12
    Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, et al. Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin. 2009; 59: 225249.
  • 13
    Ramsey SD, Yoon P, Moonesinghe R, Khoury MJ. Population-based study of the prevalence of family history of cancer: implications for cancer screening and prevention. Genet Med. 2006; 8: 571575.
  • 14
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2005; 143: 355361.
  • 15
    Hall IJ, Middlebrooks A, Coughlin SS. Population prevalence of first-degree family history of breast and ovarian cancer in the United States: implications for genetic testing. Open Health Serv Policy J. 2008; 1: 3447.
  • 16
    Murff HJ, Greevy RA, Syngal S. The comprehensiveness of family cancer history assessments in primary care. Community Genet. 2007; 10: 174180.
  • 17
    Smith R. Commentary: Breast self examination: do we really know what we think we know? BMJ USA. 2003; 3: 168169.
  • 18
    Tabar L, Duffy SW, Vitak B, Chen HH, Prevost TC. The natural history of breast carcinoma: what have we learned from screening? Cancer. 1999; 86: 449462.
  • 19
    Walter LC, Covinsky KE. Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making. JAMA. 2001; 285: 27502756.
  • 20
    Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989; 81: 18791886.
  • 21
    Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Implications for risk prediction. Cancer. 1994; 73: 643651.
  • 22
    Tyrer J, Duffy SW, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004; 23: 11111130.
  • 23
    Berry DA, Iversen ES Jr, Gudbjartsson DF, et al. BRCAPRO validation, sensitivity of genetic testing of BRCA1/BRCA2, and prevalence of other breast cancer susceptibility genes. J Clin Oncol. 2002; 20: 27012712.
  • 24
    Antoniou AC, Pharoah PP, Smith P, Easton DF. The BOADICEA model of genetic susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer. 2004; 91: 15801590.
  • 25
    Weinstein SP, Localio AR, Conant EF, et al. Multimodality screening of high-risk women: a prospective cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27: 61246128.
  • 26
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 716726, W-236.
  • 27
    Herszenhorn DM. Senate blocks use of new mammogram guidelines. New York Times. December 3, 2009.
  • 28
    Benning T. Komen for the Cure founder Nancy Brinker blasts proposed new mammography guidelines. Dallas Morning News. December 13, 2009.
  • 29
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: recommendations and rationale. Ann Intern Med. 2002; 137: 344346.
  • 30
    US Preventive Services Task Force. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Ratings. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research; 2007.
  • 31
    Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Screening for Breast Cancer. 2009. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf/uspsbrca.htm.
  • 32
    Moss SM, Cuckle H, Evans A, et al. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality at 10 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2006; 368: 20532060.
  • 33
    Blanks RG, Moss SM, Wallis MG. A comparison of two view and one view mammography in the detection of small invasive cancers: results from the National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen. 1996; 3: 200203.
  • 34
    Nelson HD, Fu R, Griffin JC, et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of medications to reduce risk for primary breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 703715, W-226–W-235.
  • 35
    Mandelblatt JS, Cronin KA, Bailey S, et al. Effects of mammography screening under different screening schedules: model estimates of potential benefits and harms. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151: 738747.
  • 36
    Brawley OW. Statement by Otis W. Brawley, MD. Washington, DC: Subcommittee on Health of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce; 2009.
  • 37
    Nelson HD, Tyne K, Naik A, et al. Screening for breast cancer: systematic evidence review update for the U. S. Preventive Services Task Force. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Research and Quality; 2009.
  • 38
    Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005; 353: 17731783.
  • 39
    Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 2008; 246: 376383.
  • 40
    DevCan. Probability of Developing or Dying of Cancer Software. Version 6.4.1. Rockville, MD: National Cancer Institute, Statistical Research and Applications Branch; 2009.
  • 41
    Horner M, Ries L, Krapcho M, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2006. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2009.
  • 42
    Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L. Periodic Screening for Breast Cancer: The Health Insurance Plan Project and Its Sequelae. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press; 1988.
  • 43
    Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program SEER 9 Registries, 1973–2006. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 2009.
  • 44
    Tabar L, Chen HH, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, Smith TC. Recent results from the Swedish Two-County Trial: the effects of age, histologic type, and mode of detection on the efficacy of breast cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997; 22: 4347.
  • 45
    Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, et al. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am. 2004; 42: 793806, v.
  • 46
    Andersson I, Janzon L. Reduced breast cancer mortality in women under age 50: updated results from the Malmo Mammographic Screening Program. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997; 22: 6367.
  • 47
    Bjurstam N, Bjorneld L, Duffy SW, et al. The Gothenburg breast screening trial: first results on mortality, incidence, and mode of detection for women ages 39–49 years at randomization. Cancer. 1997; 80: 20912099; comments: 1997;80:2035–2039, 1998;83:186–190.
  • 48
    Hendrick RE, Smith RA, Rutledge JH III, Smart CR. Benefit of screening mammography in women aged 40–49: a new meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997; 22: 8792.
  • 49
    Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2002; 137: 347360.
  • 50
    Gabe R, Duffy SW. Evaluation of service screening mammography in practice: the impact on breast cancer mortality. Ann Oncol. 2005; 16( suppl 2): ii153ii162.
  • 51
    Coldman A, Phillips N, Warren L, Kan L. Breast cancer mortality after screening mammography in British Columbia women. Int J Cancer. 2007; 120: 10761080.
  • 52
    Tabar L, Yen MF, Vitak B, Chen HH, Smith RA, Duffy SW. Mammography service screening and mortality in breast cancer patients: 20-year follow-up before and after introduction of screening. Lancet. 2003; 361: 14051410.
  • 53
    Swedish Organized Service Screening Evaluation Group. Effect of mammographic service screening on stage at presentation of breast cancers in Sweden. Cancer. 2007; 109: 22052212.
  • 54
    Feig SA. Adverse effects of screening mammography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2004; 42: 807819, v.
  • 55
    Berg WA, Hendrick E, Kopans DB, Smith RA. Frequently Asked Questions About Mammography and the USPSTF Recommendations: A Guide for Practitioners. Reston, VA: Society of Breast Imaging; 2009.
  • 56
    Duffy SW, Agbaje O, Tabar L, et al. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: estimates of overdiagnosis from two trials of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2005; 7: 258265.
  • 57
    Yen MF, Tabar L, Vitak B, et al. Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 2003; 39: 17461754.
  • 58
    Zahl PH, Maehlen J, Welch HG. The natural history of invasive breast cancers detected by screening mammography. Arch Intern Med. 2008; 168: 23112316.
  • 59
    Yankaskas BC, Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, et al. Association between mammography timing and measures of screening performance in the United States. Radiology. 2005; 234: 363373.
  • 60
    Brewer NT, Salz T, Lillie SE. Systematic review: the long-term effects of false-positive mammograms. Ann Intern Med. 2007; 146: 502510.
  • 61
    Rimer BK, Bluman LG. The psychosocial consequences of mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1997; ( 22): 131138.
  • 62
    Brett J, Bankhead C, Henderson B, Watson E, Austoker J. The psychological impact of mammographic screening. A systematic review. Psychooncology. 2005; 14: 917938.
  • 63
    Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Sox HC, Fischhoff B, Welch HG. US women's attitudes to false positive mammography results and detection of ductal carcinoma in situ: cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2000; 320: 16351640.
  • 64
    Sickles EA. Successful methods to reduce false-positive mammography interpretations. Radiol Clin North Am. 2000; 38: 693700.
  • 65
    Tabar L, Faberberg G, Day NE, Holmberg L. What is the optimum interval between mammographic screening examinations? An analysis based on the latest results of the Swedish two-county breast cancer screening trial. Br J Cancer. 1987; 55: 547551.
  • 66
    Anderson TJ, Waller M, Ellis IO, Bobrow L, Moss S. Influence of annual mammography from age 40 on breast cancer pathology. Hum Pathol. 2004; 35: 12521259.
  • 67
    White E, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Biennial versus annual mammography and the risk of late-stage breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96: 18321839.
  • 68
    Buist DS, Porter PL, Lehman C, Taplin SH, White E. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40–49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96: 14321440.
  • 69
    Rys P, Wladysiuk M, Skrzekowska-Baran I, Malecki MT. Review articles, systematic reviews and meta-analyses: which can be trusted? Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2009; 119: 148156.
  • 70
    Saslow D, Runowicz CD, Solomon D, et al. American Cancer Society guideline for the early detection of cervical neoplasia and cancer. CA Cancer J Clin. 2002; 52: 342362.
  • 71
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. USPHS/IDSA guidelines for the prevention of opportunistic infections in persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus: a summary. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1995; 44(RR-8): 134.
  • 72
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National, State, and Local Area Vaccination Coverage Among Adolescents Aged 13–17 Years—United States, 2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009; 58: 9971001.
  • 73
    Jain N, Euler GL, Shefer A, et al. Human papillomavirus (HPV) awareness and vaccination initiation among women in the United States, National Immunization Survey-Adult 2007. Prev Med. 2009; 48: 426431.
  • 74
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin number 109, December 2009: Cervical cytology screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2009; 114: 14091420.
  • 75
    Rex DK, Kahi CJ, Levin B, et al. Guidelines for colonoscopy surveillance after cancer resection: a consensus update by the American Cancer Society and the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2006; 130: 18651871.
  • 76
    Allison JE, Lawson M. Screening tests for colorectal cancer: a menu of options remains relevant. Curr Oncol Rep. 2006; 8: 492498.
  • 77
    Leard LE, Savides TJ, Ganiats TG. Patient preferences for colorectal cancer screening. J Fam Pract. 1997; 45: 211218.
  • 78
    Collins JF, Lieberman DA, Durbin TE, Weiss DG. Accuracy of screening for fecal occult blood on a single stool sample obtained by digital rectal examination: a comparison with recommended sampling practice. Ann Intern Med. 2005; 142: 8185.
  • 79
    Winawer S, Fletcher R, Rex D, et al. Colorectal cancer screening and surveillance: clinical guidelines and rationale—update based on new evidence. Gastroenterology. 2003; 124: 544560.
  • 80
    Walker JL, Nunez ER. Endometrial cancer. In: KramerBS, GohaganJK, ProrokPC, eds. Cancer Screening: Theory and Practice. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 1999: 531566.
  • 81
    Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL III, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 13101319.
  • 82
    Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 13201328.
  • 83
    Potosky AL, Davis WW, Hoffman RM, et al. Five-year outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: the prostate cancer outcomes study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96: 13581367.
  • 84
    Boyle P. Prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing as screening for prostate cancer: the current controversy. Ann Oncol. 1998; 9: 12631264.
  • 85
    Hoffman RM, Couper MP, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, et al. Prostate cancer screening decisions: results from the National Survey of Medical Decisions (DECISIONS study). Arch Intern Med. 2009; 169: 16111618.
  • 86
    US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for prostate cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2008; 149: 185191.
  • 87
    American Urological Association Education and Research. Prostate-Specific Antigen Best Practice Statement: 2009 Update. Linthicum, MD: American Urological Association Education and Research; 2009.
  • 88
    Eddy D. Guidelines for the cancer related checkup: recommendations and rationale. CA Cancer J Clin. 1980: 350.
  • 89
    Henschke CI, McCauley DI, Yankelevitz DF, et al. Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening. Lancet. 1999; 354: 99105; comments: 1999;354:86–87, 2000;355:592–593; 1999;354:1205, 1999;354:1206, 1999;354:1206, 1999;354:1206–1207, 1999;354:1207.
  • 90
    Pastorino U, Bellomi M, Landoni C, et al. Early lung-cancer detection with spiral CT and positron emission tomography in heavy smokers: 2-year results. Lancet. 2003; 362: 593597.
  • 91
    Ford LG, Minasian LM, McCaskill-Stevens W, et al. Prevention and early detection clinical trials: opportunities for primary care providers and their patients. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003; 53: 82101.
  • 92
    Henschke CI, Yankelevitz DF, Libby DM, et al. Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening. N Engl J Med. 2006; 355: 17631771.
  • 93
    Byrne MM, Weissfeld J, Roberts MS. Anxiety, fear of cancer, and perceived risk of cancer following lung cancer screening. Med Decis Making. 2008; 28: 917925.
  • 94
    Maciosek MV, Coffield AB, Edwards NM, et al. Priorities among effective clinical preventive services: results of a systematic review and analysis. Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31: 5261.
  • 95
    Smith RA, Cokkinides V, Brawley OW. Cancer screening in the United States, 2008: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and cancer screening issues. CA Cancer J Clin. 2008; 58: 161179.
  • 96
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Use of colorectal cancer tests—United States, 2002, 2004, and 2006. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2008; 57: 253258.
  • 97
    Schenck AP, Peacock SC, Klabunde CN, et al. Trends in colorectal cancer test use in the Medicare population, 1998–2005. Am J Prev Med. 2009; 37: 17.
  • 98
    Maxwell AE, Crespi CM. Trends in colorectal cancer screening utilization among ethnic groups in California: are we closing the gap? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009; 18: 752759.
  • 99
    Doubeni CA, Laiyemo AO, Reed G, Field TS, Fletcher RH. Socioeconomic and racial patterns of colorectal cancer screening among Medicare enrollees in 2000 to 2005. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009; 18: 21702175.
  • 100
    Esserman L, Shieh Y, Thompson I. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. JAMA. 2009; 302: 16851692.
  • 101
    Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM, et al. Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer incidence trends. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002; 94: 981990.
  • 102
    Duffy SW, Lynge E, Jonsson H, Ayyaz S, Olsen AH. Complexities in the estimation of overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening. Br J Cancer. 2008; 99: 11761178.
  • 103
    Etzioni R, Feuer E. Studies of prostate-cancer mortality: caution advised. Lancet Oncol. 2008; 9: 407409.
  • 104
    Sasieni PD. Outcomes of screening to prevent cancer: think of screening as insurance. BMJ. 2003; 327: 50; author reply: 50.
  • 105
    American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. ACOG Practice Bulletin 45, August 2003: cervical cytology screening. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102: 417427.