The Need For Annual Breast MRI In Addition To Annual Mammography.
Women who have had teat cancer should ponder annual screening with breast MRI in annex to an annual mammogram, new research indicates. Currently, the American Cancer Society recommends annual heart MRI plus mammography for women at very high risk for chest cancer, such as those with a known genetic mutation known as BRCA or those with a very strong family history. But it takes no locate on MRI imaging for women who have had breast cancer, saying there is not enough evidence to guide one way or the other.
Studying the effectiveness of MRI screening on all three groups of women, Dr Wendy DeMartini, an helper professor of radiology at the University of Washington Medical School, said MRI imaging found proportionally more cancers in women who had been treated for tit cancer than in the women considered at very turbulent risk. "Women in the personal history group who had MRI were also less likely to be recalled for additional testing, and less acceptable to have a biopsy for a false positive finding".
DeMartini was scheduled to present the findings Sunday at the annual assembly of the Radiological Society of North America in Chicago. For the study, her team reviewed endorse breast MRI exams of 1026 women, conducted from January 2004 to June 2009. Of these, 327 had a genetic or house history; 646 had a personal the of breast cancer that had been treated.
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Showing posts with label history. Show all posts
Monday 14 May 2018
Thursday 3 August 2017
The Genetic History Of The Father Also Affect Cancers Of Female Organs
The Genetic History Of The Father Also Affect Cancers Of Female Organs.
Women with female relatives who have had knocker or ovarian cancer are often acutely wise of their own increased endanger and may seek genetic counseling. But they should also pay distinction to their father's family history, one genetic counselor warns. The inherited genetic predisposition to core and ovarian cancer is mostly caused by a mutation in one or both of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 tumor suppressor genes, said Jeanna McCuaig, a genetic counselor at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto.
And, she piercing out, "if your mom or your dad has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, you would have a 50 percent inadvertent of inheriting it from either one". That explains why a father's issue history is as important to consider as a mother's. "Anecdotally, I've had patients come in and say, 'I never ruminating about my dad's side,'" McCuaig said. She asseverative to do some research into the implications of that statement. "We took two years of serene charts referred to our clinic, referred as new patients, and looked to see how many had relatives with heart or ovarian cancers on the mom's side versus the dad".
She found that patients who came to her Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Clinic at the sanatorium were more than five times more likely to be referred with a maternal family yesterday of breast or ovarian cancer than a paternal history of such cancers. To get the word out, she wrote a commentary on the subject, published online in The Lancet Oncology.
Women with female relatives who have had knocker or ovarian cancer are often acutely wise of their own increased endanger and may seek genetic counseling. But they should also pay distinction to their father's family history, one genetic counselor warns. The inherited genetic predisposition to core and ovarian cancer is mostly caused by a mutation in one or both of the BRCA1 or BRCA2 tumor suppressor genes, said Jeanna McCuaig, a genetic counselor at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto.
And, she piercing out, "if your mom or your dad has a BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, you would have a 50 percent inadvertent of inheriting it from either one". That explains why a father's issue history is as important to consider as a mother's. "Anecdotally, I've had patients come in and say, 'I never ruminating about my dad's side,'" McCuaig said. She asseverative to do some research into the implications of that statement. "We took two years of serene charts referred to our clinic, referred as new patients, and looked to see how many had relatives with heart or ovarian cancers on the mom's side versus the dad".
She found that patients who came to her Familial Breast and Ovarian Cancer Clinic at the sanatorium were more than five times more likely to be referred with a maternal family yesterday of breast or ovarian cancer than a paternal history of such cancers. To get the word out, she wrote a commentary on the subject, published online in The Lancet Oncology.
Thursday 5 December 2013
Early Mammography For Women Younger Than 50 Years With A Moderate History
Early Mammography For Women Younger Than 50 Years With A Moderate History.
Mammograms given to women under 50 with a temperate class history of soul cancer can spot cancers earlier and increase the odds for long-term survival, a new cramming shows. British researchers examined mammogram results for 6,710 women with several relatives with heart of hearts cancer, or at least one relative diagnosed before age 40, finding that 136 were diagnosed with the malignancy between 2003 and 2007. These women, who researchers said were quite not carriers of a mutated BRCA heart cancer gene, started receiving mammograms at an earlier age than recommended by the UK National Health Service, which currently offers the screenings every three years for women between the ages of 50 and 70.
Findings showed their tumors were smaller and less quarrelsome than those in women screened at normal ages, and these women were more acceptable to be alive 10 years after diagnosis of an invasive cancer, the researchers said. "We were not unreservedly surprised at the findings," said lead researcher Stephen Duffy, a professor of cancer screening at Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry at Queen Mary University of London.
And "There is already validation that inhabitants screening with mammography works in women under 50, even if it is less less effective than at later ages. However, there is evidence that women with a family history have denser core tissue, which makes mammography a tougher job, so we were not sure what to expect," Duffy noted. "We did not explicitly omit BRCA-positive women," he added, "but very few with an identified mutation were recruits, and because the women had a unexceptional rather than an extensive family history, we suspect there were very few cases among the vast majority who had not been tested for mutations".
Duffy juxtaposed his findings against the stylish debate among US public health experts, who diverge over whether annual mammograms are necessary beginning at the age of 40, which has been the standard for years. In November 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force sparked wrath when it revised its mammogram recommendations, suggesting that screenings can hang about until age 50 and be given every other year.
And "There are two issues here," Duffy said. "The inception is that there is some evidence of a mortality benefit of screening women in their 40s, albeit a lesser one than in older women. The assistant is that our study does not relate to natives screening, but to mammographic surveillance of women who are concerned about their family history of breast or ovarian cancer," he explained.
Mammograms given to women under 50 with a temperate class history of soul cancer can spot cancers earlier and increase the odds for long-term survival, a new cramming shows. British researchers examined mammogram results for 6,710 women with several relatives with heart of hearts cancer, or at least one relative diagnosed before age 40, finding that 136 were diagnosed with the malignancy between 2003 and 2007. These women, who researchers said were quite not carriers of a mutated BRCA heart cancer gene, started receiving mammograms at an earlier age than recommended by the UK National Health Service, which currently offers the screenings every three years for women between the ages of 50 and 70.
Findings showed their tumors were smaller and less quarrelsome than those in women screened at normal ages, and these women were more acceptable to be alive 10 years after diagnosis of an invasive cancer, the researchers said. "We were not unreservedly surprised at the findings," said lead researcher Stephen Duffy, a professor of cancer screening at Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry at Queen Mary University of London.
And "There is already validation that inhabitants screening with mammography works in women under 50, even if it is less less effective than at later ages. However, there is evidence that women with a family history have denser core tissue, which makes mammography a tougher job, so we were not sure what to expect," Duffy noted. "We did not explicitly omit BRCA-positive women," he added, "but very few with an identified mutation were recruits, and because the women had a unexceptional rather than an extensive family history, we suspect there were very few cases among the vast majority who had not been tested for mutations".
Duffy juxtaposed his findings against the stylish debate among US public health experts, who diverge over whether annual mammograms are necessary beginning at the age of 40, which has been the standard for years. In November 2009, the US Preventive Services Task Force sparked wrath when it revised its mammogram recommendations, suggesting that screenings can hang about until age 50 and be given every other year.
And "There are two issues here," Duffy said. "The inception is that there is some evidence of a mortality benefit of screening women in their 40s, albeit a lesser one than in older women. The assistant is that our study does not relate to natives screening, but to mammographic surveillance of women who are concerned about their family history of breast or ovarian cancer," he explained.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)