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
. 2023 Aug 2:11:100510.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejro.2023.100510. eCollection 2023 Dec.

A scoping review of programme specific mammographic breast density related guidelines and practices within breast screening programmes

Jessica O'Driscoll  1 , Aileen Burke  1 , Therese Mooney  2 , Niall Phelan  3 , Paola Baldelli  3 , Alan Smith  2 , Suzanne Lynch  3 , Patricia Fitzpatrick  2   4 , Kathleen Bennett  1 , Fidelma Flanagan  3 , Maeve Mullooly  1
Affiliations

A scoping review of programme specific mammographic breast density related guidelines and practices within breast screening programmes

Jessica O'Driscoll et al. Eur J Radiol Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: High mammographic breast density (MBD) is an independent breast cancer risk factor. In organised breast screening settings, discussions are ongoing regarding the optimal clinical role of MBD to help guide screening decisions. The aim of this scoping review was to provide an overview of current practices incorporating MBD within population-based breast screening programmes and from professional organisations internationally.

Methods: This scoping review was conducted in accordance with the framework proposed by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The electronic databases, MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, CINAHL Plus, Scopus, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Grey literature sources, websites of international breast screening programmes, and relevant government organisations were searched to identify further relevant literature. Data from identified materials were extracted and presented as a narrative summary.

Results: The search identified 78 relevant documents. Documents were identified for breast screening programmes in 18 countries relating to screening intervals for women with dense breasts, MBD measurement, reporting, notification, and guiding supplemental screening. Documents were identified from 18 international professional organisations with the majority of material relating to supplemental screening guidance for women with dense breasts. Key factors collated during the data extraction process as relevant considerations for MBD practices included the evidence base needed to inform decision-making processes and resources (healthcare system costs, radiology equipment, and workforce planning).

Conclusions: This scoping review summarises current practices and guidelines incorporating MBD in international population-based breast screening settings and highlights the absence of consensus between organised breast screening programmes incorporating MBD in current breast screening protocols.

Keywords: Breast cancer screening programme; Evidence-based guidelines; Mammographic breast density; Scoping review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flowchart of the document selection process.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sung H., Ferlay J., Siegel R.L., Laversanne M., Soerjomataram I., Jemal A., Bray F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: Cancer J. Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ferlay J., M L., Ervik M., Lam F., Colombet M., Mery L., Piñeros M., Znaor A., Soerjomataram I., Bray F. International Agency for Research on Cancer; Lyon, France: 2020. Global Cancer Observatory: Cancer Tomorrow.
    1. Canelo-Aybar C., Ferreira D.S., Ballesteros M., Posso M., Montero N., Solà I., Saz-Parkinson Z., Lerda D., Rossi P.G., Duffy S.W., Follmann Markus Gräwingholt Axel A.-C.P. Benefits and harms of breast cancer mammography screening for women at average risk of breast cancer: a systematic review for the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer. J. Med. Screen. 2021;28(4):389–404. doi: 10.1177/0969141321993866. - DOI - PubMed
    1. A. Ponti, A. Anttila, G. Ronco, C. Senore, P. Basu, N. Segnan, M. Tomati, M. Žakelj, J. Dillner, M. Fernan, K. Elfström, S. Lönnberg, I. Soerjomataram, R. Sankaranaryanan, D. Vale, Cancer screening in the European Union. Report on the implementation of the council recommendation on cancer screening, European Commission, Brussels, 2017.
    1. Williams J., Garvican L., Tosteson A.N.A., Goodman D.C., Onega T. Breast cancer screening in England and the United States: a comparison of provision and utilisation. Int. J. Public Health. 2015;60(8):881–890. doi: 10.1007/s00038-015-0740-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources