Digital vs Film-Screen Mammography for Breast Cancer

3
2,476 views
Doctor With a Mammogram
 

Breast cancer is, like all cancers, something that should be caught as early as possible, and testing has proven to be a very good thing.

Although the rate of breast cancer rose throughout the 90s, the amount of death it caused over that time actually went slightly down, which some experts believe is due to increased adoption of testing procedures like the mammography.

(On an unrelated but interesting note, the amount of breast cancer went down for the first time in the early 2000s, which may be due to less use of hormone replacement therapy.)

Testing saves lives.  Getting routinely tested for breast cancer could lower the risk of dying from it around 30% in women older than 50, and around 20% in women 40-50.  But how often and at what ages should mammograms be done?

The tests, after all, are pretty non-specific.  A significant majority of mammograms that require further testing via biopsy are false-positives, which has significant economic and personal impact.  Imagine being told you might have cancer.  It’s very scary.

That said, breast cancer testing is a far cry from situations like that with prostate cancer.  The initial tests for prostate cancer are 10-15% positive in healthy people, require multiple biopsies, and perhaps lead to a over-diagnosis rate possibly higher than 50%.

The three main tests for detecting breast cancer are: mammography, MRI, and sonography.  There is a lot of debate over which methods to use and when, and each method has its own variations and methods.  This article looks only at digital versus film-screen mammography.

Digital mammography is an emerging and increasingly popular method of mammography, versus the film-screen mammography that, logically enough, uses film.  Importantly, the digital tests are at least as effective as the film version, but may be better at detecting abnormalities in pre-menopausal women.  This is because the digital method allows greater manipulation for contrast and brightness and can detect cancers in women with denser breasts.  And younger women have denser breasts.

Additionally, digital mammography may be superior at detecting cancer early on in women who are BRCA mutants and at very high risk.  Someone with a BRCA1/2 mutation, for instance, may have a lifetime risk of 21-65% of breast cancer, most happening before age 40.  Detecting cancer in those women is so a very high priority.

Finally, digital mammography may use less radiation, and provide digital results that don’t take up space, can be read by multiple experts at the same time, and all the benefits of having something be digital versus a physical copy.

That said, digital testing is more expensive and requires more training.  Some technicians may prefer being able to hold results and inspect them by hand.  Other limitations of digital screening include the large file sizes – which may be an issue on less than ideal computers.

Also, there is the theoretical possibility that a certain type of abnormality in breast tissue, that of calcifications – where growing cells leave traces of calcium – might be not seeable on digital screens.  This could happen if the abnormality is smaller than a pixel and so missed.

A major study, the Digital Mammographic Image Screening Trial (DMIST), looked at about 50,000 women who used either digital or screening mammography.  It found no difference in terms of diagnostic accuracy, but that digital were better at finding cancer in younger women.  That said, however, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of size or stage of breast cancer when it was detected.

Ultimately, the most important factor may continue to be the expertise of the person reading the test results.

SHARE
Previous articleWhat Sucks & What Rocks About ADHD
Next articleA Full List of ADHD Medications
Pharmaceutical analyst who loves blogging about health and medical issues. Has written more than 150 articles and a book on attention deficit disorder. Correctly predicted delayed approval of Bydureon, approval of Provenge by FDA, and the non-approval of Acthar on June 11.

Warning: date() expects parameter 2 to be long, string given in /home1/waejf60acuo4/public_html/wp-content/themes/Newspaper/includes/wp_booster/td_module_single_base.php on line 576
">

3 COMMENTS

  1. Charlotte Hannemann

    My oldest sister is dying from Her2 + breast cancer which has metastasized to her brain, lungs and bones. Her doctor (at MD Anderson in Houston, TX) told her that her remaining two sisters should have a digital mammogram and perhaps later on even her 2 nieces. We have a stron family history of either breast or other female cancers in our family and we all are a bit frightened. When I discussed this with my obgyn she dismissed what I told her and ordered the regular type of mammogram claiming that we would wait until or if something showed up. What is your opinion? By the way our ages are 52, 54, 56 (the one crrently dying).

  2. Patricia Jabbour

    I think that u should have the digital, u have a sister who is dying and u have a family history, i was diagnost 6 years ago with stage 3 breast cancer i was 46 years old, i have a sister who was diagnost 17 days after me, hers was found in her first mammogram, i felt my lump. We do not have a family history of this. For the past six years i have been getting digital mammograms, i was told that it would see a lot more than a regular mammogram. all my sisters (4) had this done, My nieces are going to talk to there pcp doctors about this also. This is a very frightening feeling, When i was told that i had breast cancer i thought the worst, I am very sorry to see that u r about to lose your sister. \my prayers and thoughts r with u and your family. Go and get the digital .

  3. Charlote Hannemann

    Sadly, I lost my sister last May (2011), a month from her 56th birthday from Stage 4 metastatic breast cancer. She had ALL her treamtments at MD Anderson in Houston. All efforts failed and she spent the last 6 months at home on Hospice. Of course, that is just a slow death by morphene – it just eventually stops your heart. I would like to say it was an easy death (if there is such a thing with cancer) but it was not. She was out of her mind from the morhpene and still experienced a lot of pain. Very hard for her and heartbreaking for family members to watch. I get angry waching all the media coverage of breast cancer survivors – they never mention the ones that DON’T survive and that they fight just as hard or harder to live. I never met one person who didn’t fight with all they had. Guess that might be too disheartening for those who are currently fighting the fight. My sister said that had she known the two years she survived from her diagnosis was going to be spent sitting at MDA 5 days a week, some times until l0:00 at night, she would have chose NOT to be treated and just enjoyed what ever time God chose to give her with family & friends. I totally agree – life is about QUALITY. QUANTITY is not always the best way to go. I speak from personal knowledge as I struggle with my own chronic illness. Of course, this IS a PERSONAL choice – or should be. Her doctor, my brother & other sister pressured her into taking treatments. I think that was extremely selfish & cruel on their part. God be with you & your sisters on your journeys – pray for His guidance and always listen to your OWN heart. After all, it is YOUR life and we only get one time around.

Comments are closed.