Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

The National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC) response to the USPSTF breast cancer screening recommendations

Don S. Dizon, MD
Conditions
January 26, 2010
Share
Tweet
Share

I’ve been given permission to deliver the National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC) position statement. It does a far better job with a critique of the USPSTF Screening recommendations than I did when I shared my first thoughts. As the President for the NCBC, I want to acknowledge the work done on behalf of our organization by our Policy Chairpersons, Drs. John Bell and Barbara Rabinowitz, both of whom are tireless champions and advocates for coordinated, interdisciplinary breast care.

The National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC), the largest national organization devoted to the inter-disciplinary care of breast disease, requests the USPSTF rescind their new position on mammography screening.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) published a paper detailing model estimates of potential benefits and harms to women screened for breast cancer with mammography. They provided an updated USPSTF recommendation statement on screening for breast cancer for the general population that alters currently accepted guidelines for women over 40 years old.

The NCBC opposes the new guidelines as written. We cite specific evidence that screening mammography leads to early detection which leads to improved survival. In every country starting population screening, mortality declines coincide with onset of screening, not systemic therapy. These USPSTF models are not based on sound data, namely different denominators in the “harms” vs. “benefits” groups leading to invalid comparisons. Recent data from randomized controlled trials reveal significant mortality reductions evident approximately five years after screening programs were initiated. The reductions in age-adjusted, disease specific mortality (30-40%) since 1990 define screening program benefits not seen in the prior six decades. In the United States, these mortality declines continue at a rate of approximately 2% per year.  This mortality improvement counts as a remarkable public health achievement.

In addition, the USPSTF panel (comprised almost exclusively of primary care physicians) did not include breast imaging specialists nor was it represented by any of the multiple other specialists who collaborate to optimize patient outcomes. These specialists include pathologists, surgeons, medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, reconstructive surgeons, technologists, geneticists, nurse navigators, educators, and others.

The NCBC does not understand the assumptions used by the USPSTF to value human life. We note the cited literature was selective and failed to acknowledge equally powerful and credible peer-reviewed literature which supports currently accepted breast cancer screening guidelines.

We would also like to note that quality of life has a significant value, not just survival. It is well established that if we discontinue mammography for women in their 40’s, the cancers eventually detected will be larger, more likely need more aggressive surgery, more likely need chemotherapy and more likely lead to other significant socio-economic concerns.

The NCBC requests input into future guideline development and vows to work with government, scientists and industry to keep the process transparent and keep the focus on the patient. We recommend further efforts target screening, risk assessment, education and awareness regarding the implications of positive and negative screening findings. Funding for further research is imperative and supported by the controversy these articles have generated.

Finally, we note the USPSTF article states “whether it will be practical or acceptable to change the existing U.S. practice of annual screening cannot be addressed by our models.” The NCBC agrees with this comment and finds their screening guideline suggestions unacceptable. The NCBC believes many women’s lives will be placed at risk if current screening guidelines are altered. We respectfully request the Task Force rescind their position on this specific women’s healthcare screening policy.

Don S. Dizon is an oncologist who blogs at The Women’s Cancer Blog.

Submit a guest post and be heard.

 

Prev

Extended military deployments to combat areas increase stress, anxiety and depression among families

January 26, 2010 Kevin 1
…
Next

How should patients decide which hospitals are best for them?

January 26, 2010 Kevin 2
…

Tagged as: Oncology/Hematology, Primary Care, Specialist

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Extended military deployments to combat areas increase stress, anxiety and depression among families
Next Post >
How should patients decide which hospitals are best for them?

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Don S. Dizon, MD

  • As an oncologist, this is the hardest role I play

    Don S. Dizon, MD
  • Why physicians should acknowledge the validity of second opinions

    Don S. Dizon, MD
  • A patient who taught an important lesson in doctoring

    Don S. Dizon, MD

More in Conditions

  • How flight surgeon training mirrors medical residency stress

    Avishek Kumar, MD
  • A school nurse’s story of trauma and nurse burnout

    Debbie Moore-Black, RN
  • SNF discharge planning: Why documentation is no longer enough

    Rafiat Banwo, OTD
  • How honoring patient autonomy prevents medical trauma

    Sheryl J. Nicholson
  • Why fear-based approaches fail in chronic illness care

    Bridgette Johnson, PhD, RN
  • Scrotal pain in young men: When to seek urgent care

    Martina Ambardjieva, MD, PhD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Examining the rural divide in pediatric health care

      James Bianchi | Policy
    • Whole-body MRI screening: political privilege or future of care?

      Michael Brant-Zawadzki, MD | Physician
    • Medical brain drain leaves vulnerable communities without life-saving care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How flight surgeon training mirrors medical residency stress

      Avishek Kumar, MD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is primary care becoming a triage station?

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Psychiatrists are physicians: a key distinction

      Farid Sabet-Sharghi, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • How flight surgeon training mirrors medical residency stress

      Avishek Kumar, MD | Conditions
    • Economic reality tests the limits of subscription medicine [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why ACIP’s ruling on universal hepatitis B vaccination endangers newborns

      A. Lane Baldwin, MD | Physician
    • AI in medicine: Why it won’t replace doctors but will redefine them

      Tod Stillson, MD | Tech
    • Claude for Healthcare vs. administrative burden: a physician’s review

      Shiv K. Goel, MD | Tech
    • The burden of being both doctor and family: an ethical reflection

      Francisco M. Torres, MD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 4 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Examining the rural divide in pediatric health care

      James Bianchi | Policy
    • Whole-body MRI screening: political privilege or future of care?

      Michael Brant-Zawadzki, MD | Physician
    • Medical brain drain leaves vulnerable communities without life-saving care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • How flight surgeon training mirrors medical residency stress

      Avishek Kumar, MD | Conditions
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why patient trust in physicians is declining

      Mansi Kotwal, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is primary care becoming a triage station?

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • A physician father on the Dobbs decision and reproductive rights

      Travis Walker, MD, MPH | Physician
    • The blind men and the elephant: a parable for modern pain management

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Conditions
    • How environmental justice and health disparities connect to climate change

      Kaitlynn Esemaya, Alexis Thompson, Annique McLune, and Anamaria Ancheta | Policy
    • Psychiatrists are physicians: a key distinction

      Farid Sabet-Sharghi, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • How flight surgeon training mirrors medical residency stress

      Avishek Kumar, MD | Conditions
    • Economic reality tests the limits of subscription medicine [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Why ACIP’s ruling on universal hepatitis B vaccination endangers newborns

      A. Lane Baldwin, MD | Physician
    • AI in medicine: Why it won’t replace doctors but will redefine them

      Tod Stillson, MD | Tech
    • Claude for Healthcare vs. administrative burden: a physician’s review

      Shiv K. Goel, MD | Tech
    • The burden of being both doctor and family: an ethical reflection

      Francisco M. Torres, MD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

The National Consortium of Breast Centers (NCBC) response to the USPSTF breast cancer screening recommendations
4 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...