Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1975 Jun 21;112(12):1405-13.

Multiple fluoroscopy of the chest: carcinogenicity for the female breast and implications for breast cancer screening programs

Multiple fluoroscopy of the chest: carcinogenicity for the female breast and implications for breast cancer screening programs

N C Delarue et al. Can Med Assoc J. .

Abstract

The risk of radiation carcinogenesis has been established for breast tissue from experience with total body irradiation and multiple fluoroscopy of the chest with the patient prone. The doubling dose has been estimated to lie between 20 and 50 rads. Before undertaking radiologic screening programs for breast cancer, therefore, it is necessary to determine whether exposures below this range are safe. Of 792 women who had had tuberculosis and were followed for a minimum of 20 years, 451 had had multiple fluoroscopy while supine; 341 had not had fluoroscopy. The first group received a total radiation dose to the breast averaging 17 rads (141.5 fluoroscopies); the incidence of breast cancer in this group was not increased. Had fluoroscopy been performed with the patient prone the total radiation dose would have averaged 308 rads. The difference is thought to explain the increased incidence of breast cancer attributable to fluoroscopy given with the patient prone. Mid-breast exposure with mammography or xeroradiography varies between 3 and 6 rads. Repetitive screening would, therefore, appear safe provided total exposure did not exceed 20 rads. With this restriction there would appear to be no reason to curtail screening of women for breast cancer.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Br J Cancer. 1965 Mar;19:1-8 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 1970 Feb 7;1(7641):297 - PubMed
    1. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1968 Nov;98(5):778-87 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 1968 Sep 26;279(13):667-71 - PubMed
    1. Can Med Assoc J. 1969 Jun 14;100(22):1032-4 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources