CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » NEWS

Oncology NEWS International. Vol. 6 No. 2
 

NIH Consensus Development Statement Sparks Rancor

February 1, 1997

BETHESDA, Md--The NIH Consensus Development Conference was unanimous in its decision not to recommend routine screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49, saying that the evidence to date does not show that any possible benefits outweigh potential risks.

The panel's draft report recommends that women in their 40s evaluate their own risk factors and decide for themselves in consultation with their physicians whether to be screened.

The draft report was not without support from members of the audience, but its framers faced passionate criticism from many cancer specialists. Debate climaxed with a statement by Richard D. Klausner, MD, director of the NCI, who disagreed with the committee report. "My own evaluation is that the data supporting the benefit of initiating screening in the 40s is stronger now than it had been," Dr. Klausner said. "It does look significant, and women need to know that." He will present the findings to the president's National Cancer Advisory Board for review in February.

Concerns and criticisms voiced at the meeting centered around two main issues: Did the panel appropriately assess new evidence provided by the most recent randomized controlled trials and did it give too much weight to potential and theoretical harm associated with mam-mography? Another issue concerned the omission of high-risk groups, especially African-Americans, from the studies upon which the panel based its decision.

Dr. Laszlo Tabar, director of mam-mography, Falun Central Hospital, Sweden, said the panel failed to adequately consider the results of four randomized controlled trials conducted in Malmö, Kopperberg/Östergötland, Stockholm, and Gothenburg, Sweden. Results of these trials show an overall reduction in mortality from breast cancer of 23% for women in their 40s who undergo screening mammography, he said.

"It seems clear," Dr. Tabar argued, "that while the size and timing of the mortality reduction rate will require further research, the existence of such a reduction is no longer in question."

R. Edward Hendrick, chief of the Department of Radiology, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, charged the panel with ignoring studies showing benefits and ignoring "the meta-analyses of those data, which show that there is a statistically significant benefit."

Ingvar Andersson, of the University Hospital, Malmö, said that he was skeptical about the appropriateness of screening for younger women. His own study showed that annual screening of 10,000 women aged 40 to 49 would save only 15 breast cancer deaths over a 10-year period, at the cost of 1,250 false-positive results requiring further testing. Nevertheless, he agreed with Dr. Tabar that the draft statement does not properly reflect the state of knowledge today.

The panel was appointed by the NIH's Office of Medical Applications of Research. To ensure impartiality, members could not have written on the subject or have a financial stake in the recommendations. Members read more than 100 papers and heard from 35 experts at the two-day meeting.

Committee Members: NIH Consensus Development For Breast Cancer Screening for Women 40 to 49

Leon Gordis, MD, Chairman, Johns Hopkins University
Donald Berry, PhD, Duke University
Susan Chu, PhD, MPH, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle
Laurie Fajardo, MD, U of Virginia
David Hoel, PhD, U of South Carolina
Leslie Laufman, MD, Hematology Oncology Consultants, Columbus, Ohio
Jeanne Petrek, MD, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Constance Rufenbarger, The Catherine Peachey Fund, Warsaw, Indiana
Julia Scott, RN, National Black Women's Health Project, Washington
Daniel Sullivan, MD, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center
John Wasson, MD, Dartmouth Medical School
Carolyn Westhoff, MD, MS, Columbia University
Ruthan Zern, MD, Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Towson, Maryland

Conference chair Leon Gordis, of Johns Hopkins, insisted that data from all recent studies were considered and that the evidence presented was not sufficient to warrant a change in policy.

The draft report was revised, however, to indicate that although randomized controlled trials show no difference in breast cancer deaths within 7 years between women assigned to receive or not receive mammography screening, "summary data from these studies have shown an increasing trend in favor of mammog-raphy with longer-term follow-up."

The panel maintains that not all women diagnosed with cancer are helped by early detection. The report pointed out that ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may not progress to invasive cancer and there is danger of inappropriate treatment.

Other risks include the false assurance of false-negative readings, anxiety caused by false-positive reports, and discomfort during the procedure. In addition, radiation exposure brings a theoretical risk of one additional cancer death per 10,000 women tested annually, the report said.

Many radiologists, however, said that the potential risk of radiation was overstated and that the psychosocial conse-quences of a false-positive or even a false-negative result were insignificant when compared with the value of early detection. Critics also pointed out that therapy for DCIS is changing and overtreat-ment is less of a concern than in the past.

The committee recommended that the costs of mammography for women in their 40s who choose it should be reimbursed by insurers or covered by HMOs. In fact, a bill has been introduced into the House by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) that would prohibit insurers from denying coverage for yearly mammo-grams to women age 40 and above.

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.






 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Five Steps to Improving Patient Access
Judy Capko,  May 21, 2013
Patient access is getting increased attention through reform initiatives. Here are five steps you can take to make sure patients get appropriate access to care in your office.
Growing HIPAA Threat – Ignore Windows XP at Your Own Peril
Marion K. Jenkins,  May 21, 2013
Chances are good that you have some major ticking software time bombs lurking in your medical practice's computer environment, namely Windows XP and Server 2003.
Finding Physician Work-Life Balance in the Small Moments
Jennifer Frank, MD,  May 21, 2013
At my practice and at home, things are always busy. There's laundry or homework, or a patient with needs.
Three Areas to Reduce Costs at Your Medical Practice
Greg Mertz,  May 19, 2013
By taking a hard look at reducing costs for staffing, overhead, and technology at your medical practice, you may see increased physician compensation.
Dos and Don’ts for Starting a Physician Blog
Michael Woo-Ming, MD,  May 18, 2013
Starting a physician blog can provide your medical practice with marketing benefits, but it's important to do it right.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Slide Show: Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
  • A 49-Year-Old Woman Develops Thickened and Bound-Down Skin
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • ONS: Understanding Spirituality and How It Can Be Used to Help Patients
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Therapy Innovations
  • A 52-Year-Old Man Presents With an Erythematous Lesion
  • Bone Metastases
  • Palliative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Bone Metastases Improves Quality of Life
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


CancerNetwork on Facebook


CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy