Recently in AJR Marc Homer commented on the wording of the mammography report [1 ]. Our intent is to support his concerns and help clarify the confusion regarding terminology, the concept of normality, and the relationship of imaging patterns to risk factors for breast cancer. The success of mammography in the detection of and screening for breast cancer is clear. No other technique now known is its equal in the detection of occult cancers. However, the examination is certainly not flawless. Many cancers escape detection, often because of interference by the density of the surrounding breast tissue. This dense breast pattern interferes with our diagnostic ability. Further, we are uncertain whether this radiographic pattern of dense breast tissue is normal (albeit a bothersome interference), distinctly abnormal, or indicative of medically meaningful risk of subsequent cancer development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Page et al. (1986) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: