But a trial in France suggests that breast cancer screening might be
just as effective and less unpleasant when women can control the
compression device themselves.
"Our study did not report any decrease in image quality when
self-compression was performed," said lead study author Dr. Philippe
Henrot of the Institut de Cancerologie de Lorraine Alexis Vautrin in
Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy.
For the study, researchers randomly assigned 548 women to either get
mammograms that allowed them to place their breasts in the machines
and control the compression themselves, or to get traditional
mammograms with radiologists positioning women's breasts.
The goal of compressing the breast is to make it as thin as possible
so radiologists get a more detailed two-dimensional image that can
make it easier to spot any abnormalities that might be cancer.
Two things can go wrong when the breast isn't compressed enough in
the mammogram machine. Either healthy tissues overlap in ways that
make it appear as if there are potentially cancerous abnormalities
and women get unnecessary invasive follow-up tests, or a real tumor
is hidden behind healthy tissue and goes undetected.
In the current study, however, when women compressed their own
breasts in the machine, they achieved breast thickness that was
within 3 millimeters of what women typically had with the
traditional mammogram process. That difference is too small to
suggest that self-compression isn't as good as traditional
mammograms, the study authors conclude in JAMA Internal Medicine.
In fact, the researchers found that women compressed their own
breasts a little bit more, on average, than radiologists did when
they controlled the machines. But women also reported less pain when
they handled compression themselves.
"Despite knowing the utility of mammograms, many women dread having
this exam, because it can be uncomfortable or painful," Henrot said
by email. "Self-compression could be proposed as an alternative in
women who dread having a mammogram."
There was also no difference between the groups in the image quality
of the mammograms or the number of additional images radiologists
had to take.
One limitation of the study is that many participants had a personal
or family history of breast cancer, which might make their
experience different than that of other women, the study authors
note.
[to top of second column] |
The study also didn't assess how much extra time it took to provide
mammograms when technicians explained to women how to handle
compression themselves. Time constraints might impact how many
places could give women this option, the researchers point out.
While more research is still needed to show that self-compression is
feasible, the results suggest that self-compression might be a way
to make the mammogram experience more tolerable, said Dr. Deborah
Korenstein of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Weill
Cornell Medical College in New York City.
"The benefit of letting women do it themselves is twofold: the main
concept is that it will result in a less painful test, which will
prevent women from avoiding future mammograms because of fear of
discomfort," Korenstein, who wasn't involved in the study, said by
email.
"It is also possible that women will actually tolerate more
compression if they can control it themselves, which would lead to
better quality images," Korenstein added. "That has not been
demonstrated but is certainly a possibility."
While some women may indeed be less reluctant to get mammograms when
the experience is more comfortable, it's impossible to know whether
self-compression could make a meaningful difference in the
proportion of women who get screening mammograms, said Dr. Karsten
Juhl Jorgensen, of the Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, in
Copenhagen, Denmark.
And discomfort during mammograms may not be the most important
problem with breast screening to address, Jorgensen, who wasn't
involved in the study, said by email.
"There are much more important harms to consider than pain, for
example the possibility to be diagnosed with cancer unnecessarily, a
risk that is several-fold greater than the chance to reduce breast
cancer mortality," Jorgensen said.
SOURCE: https://bit.ly/2BnFrXR JAMA Internal Medicine, online
February 4, 2019.
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |