Community Forum top_calendar.gif top_members.gif top_faq.gif top_search.gif top_home.gif    

Go Back   Community Forum > The Internet Medical Journal > News
User Name
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old July 28th, 2004, 23:14
sysadmin sysadmin is offline
Join Date: 2001
Posts: 1,085
MRI & Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening

This study looked at 1909 women with a familial or genetic predisposition to breast cancer, and compared MRI screening versus mammographic screening. The study found that the MRI was much more sensitive than mammography (79.5% vs 33.3%), while only a bit less specific (89.8% vs 95.0%). COMMENT: the policy of the NEJM not to publish full journal content harms the poorest people in the world. Those least able to afford to pay, are forced to pay by a company located in perhaps the richest part of the richest country of the world (New England region of the US). We cannot look into the guts of this article because only the abstract is provided free online. So, in this group of women, we can only say that the MRI scan looks promising. But who should get one instead of a mammogram? What about PET or SPECT Tc-sestamibi scanning? Who gets a PET scan instead of a colonoscopy (for colon cancer), chest x-ray (or chest CT for lung cancer), or mammogram (or MRI for breast cancer)? The PET scan would screen for all of the above in one single scan, it is noninvasive, and in the long run would likely save money.

Mieke Kriege, M.Sc., Cecile T.M. Brekelmans, M.D., Ph.D., Carla Boetes, M.D., Ph.D., Peter E. Besnard, M.D., Ph.D., Harmine M. Zonderland, M.D., Ph.D., Inge Marie Obdeijn, M.D., Radu A. Manoliu, M.D., Ph.D., Theo Kok, M.D., Ph.D., Hans Peterse, M.D., Madeleine M.A. Tilanus-Linthorst, M.D., Sara H. Muller, M.D., Ph.D., Sybren Meijer, M.D., Ph.D., Jan C. Oosterwijk, M.D., Ph.D., Louk V.A.M. Beex, M.D., Ph.D., Rob A.E.M. Tollenaar, M.D., Ph.D., Harry J. de Koning, M.D., Ph.D., Emiel J.T. Rutgers, M.D., Ph.D., Jan G.M. Klijn, M.D., Ph.D., for the Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Study Group



NEJM Volume 351:427-437 July 29, 2004 Number 5

Last edited by sysadmin : July 28th, 2004 at 23:43.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mammography Has Low Risk of Recall For False Positive Findings sysadmin News 0 August 26th, 2004 18:58
USPSTF: Screening for Bladder Cancer NOT Recommended sysadmin News 0 July 5th, 2004 10:41
Screening for Ovarian Cancer sysadmin News 0 June 7th, 2004 07:13
August 2002 sysadmin News 0 September 2nd, 2002 19:44
July 2002 sysadmin News 0 August 12th, 2002 19:08

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:27.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Be careful about reading health books. You may die of a misprint.  
- Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)

We are committed to your good health. That means that while we provide editorial medical information, we must insist that you work with your own doctor in regards to your personal health issues. All content on Medjournal.Com is strictly editorial. It constitutes medical opinion, NOT ADVICE. We do not endorse or recommend the content of or the sites that are linked FROM or TO Use common sense by consulting with your doctor before making any lifestyle changes or other medical decisions based on the content of these web pages. Medjournal.Com and the Internet Medical Journal shall not be held liable for any errors in content, advertising, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon.