Reply to Mammograms in 40s

Forum Index » Health and Medicine

Reply to "Mammograms in 40s"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]When I was in my 40s, there were conflicting recommendations. ACS said yearly at 40, ACOG said yearly at 45, USPSTF said yearly at 50.

I am low-risk and waited to 48 to start. During that time, I was being periodically reminded by FB friends who had caught DCIS or even higher-stage breast cancers via mammograms done early how important it was to do this.

Usually these folks did not share information about their own risk factors, which can be quantified using this tool: https://magview.com/ibis-risk-calculator/ (warning: it's a long intake--quite thorough).

To date, I have not gotten breast cancer, and earlier mammograms would not have impacted any breast cancer I might eventually get. It was a good choice for me.  [/quote]

[b]The risk calculator is based on family history.[/b] That's it.

The calculator gives me very high risk - 60% - because I have a sister and a cousin with breast cancer. But [i]they[/i] were both low risk, because there was no family history before them (both diagnosed the same year, one with stage 3 at her first mammogram). We have all done the genetic testing now and have no genetic markers, which is common.

I think there are discussions to be had about false positives and additional screening/biopsy because of frequent screening. But the idea you are "low risk" does not mean what people think it does. It just means you don't (yet) know if your relatives have or will have cancer. [/quote]

You might click through and see. The statement that this risk screen covers only family history is not accurate. It also covers age of first menstruation and pregnancy, hormone exposure, height, weight and breast density, among others. They’re are all known risk factors.

It’s true that the family history questions are lengthy—because of all of the other cancers genetically related to breast cancer.

FWIW, this is also the screen that is used to determine whether to recommend regular MRI to women with dense breasts.

[/quote]

PP you're responding to - I did click through and take it, that's how I got the 60%. I've also taken a similar test through my doc (gave me 56%). The family history is the most relevant factor because the majority of women have dense breasts, the majority of adult women have been pregnant, etc.

You can't get insurance to cover a breast MRI just because you have dense breasts + you're overweight or take HRT or got your period at age 9. Those won't move the risk needle enough. It really just turns on family history. Or genetic tests, but a minority of breast cancer patients have genetic markers that we know how to test for.

My point is, the absence of "high risk" factors does not make you low risk. It just means your risk is not known to be high. [/quote]

I agree that it’s hard to prove a negative.

I was comfortable with the state of our ability to assess risk now, waited to 48 for a mammogram, and nothing bad happened.

I am sorry your family members are having to go/had to go through treatment and hope they are doing well.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics