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
Review
. 2018 Dec:42:102-112.
doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2018.09.001. Epub 2018 Sep 11.

The impact of legislation mandating breast density notification - Review of the evidence

Affiliations
Review

The impact of legislation mandating breast density notification - Review of the evidence

Nehmat Houssami et al. Breast. 2018 Dec.

Abstract

Breast density (BD) is an independent risk factor for breast cancer and reduces the sensitivity of mammography. The enactment of BD legislation in a majority of states in the USA mandating notification of risks associated with BD directly to women undergoing mammography has catapulted interest in BD among women, physicians, and policymakers. We therefore report a descriptive review of the evidence on the impact of enactment of BD legislation. Based on 22 eligible studies, we identified four broad themes of research: studies of the impact on screening rates, most showing increased utilisation of supplemental screening; studies exploring the effect on women, radiologists, or primary physicians (reporting heterogeneous effects on knowledge, awareness, perceptions, attitudes and behaviour; and changes in practice); few studies assessing the population impact (effect on screening outcomes or breast cancer stage); and studies of costs highlighting the economic burden from supplemental screening. Given that many of the studies were retrospective single institution studies (comparing pre- and post-legislation) or small surveys with a paucity of population-level studies, we highlight areas meriting additional research. The information described in this review can inform research priorities where BD legislation has been introduced and can be used to guide world-wide policy or practice decisions where BD legislation may be under debate or contemplation.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Breast density; Legislation; Mammography; Population screening.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest/ disclosure statements: N. Houssami has no conflict of interest. C. Lee receives grant funding from GE Healthcare for research unrelated to this work.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. McCormack VA, Dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: A meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers Prevention 2006; 15:1159–1169. - PubMed
    1. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine 2007; 356:227–236. - PubMed
    1. Tagliafico A, Calabrese M, Mariscotti G, Durando M, Tosto S. Adjunct screening with tomosynthesis or ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: Interim report of a prospective comparative trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2016; 34:1882–1888. - PubMed
    1. Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP, et al. Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Annals of Internal Medicine 2016; 164:268–278. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Slanetz PJ, Freer PE, Birdwell RL. Breast-density legislation--practical considerations. New England Journal of Medicine 2015; 372:593–595. - PubMed

MeSH terms