Breast density legislation: mandatory disclosure to patients, alternative screening, billing, reimbursement.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is describe the origins and provisions of breast density legislation and to evaluate these mandates with regard to the balance between the potential benefit of supplementary screening and the substantial risk of false-positive findings and the adjunctive tests they necessitate. CONCLUSION. Many states have passed breast density notification legislation, and federal legislation is pending. These mandates present a number of challenges for patients and physicians. There is no consensus regarding the need for supplementary testing solely because a woman has dense breasts. The failure of density legislation to require insurance coverage in many states further complicates implementation of the mandates.

[1]  Etta D Pisano,et al.  Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. , 2012, JAMA.

[2]  Madhavi Raghu,et al.  Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. , 2013, Radiology.

[3]  Jessica W T Leung,et al.  The California breast density information group: a collaborative response to the issues of breast density, breast cancer risk, and breast density notification legislation. , 2013, Radiology.

[4]  A. Miller,et al.  Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  Rhian Gabe,et al.  The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? , 2004, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[6]  D. Wakefield,et al.  Real World Performance of Screening Breast Ultrasound Following Enactment of Connecticut Bill 458 , 2013, The breast journal.

[7]  C. Merritt Combined Screening With Ultrasound and Mammography vs Mammography Alone in Women at Elevated Risk of Breast Cancer , 2009 .

[8]  D. Miglioretti,et al.  Individual and Combined Effects of Age, Breast Density, and Hormone Replacement Therapy Use on the Accuracy of Screening Mammography , 2003, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[9]  E. Sickles The use of breast imaging to screen women at high risk for cancer. , 2010, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[10]  Emily F Conant,et al.  Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. , 2014, JAMA.

[11]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. , 2013, Radiology.

[12]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. , 2013, The Lancet. Oncology.

[13]  Carl J D'Orsi,et al.  To seek perfection or not? That is the question. , 2012, Radiology.

[14]  L. Philpotts,et al.  Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. , 2012, Radiology.

[15]  A. Holland,et al.  Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice. , 2014, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  Malcolm C Pike,et al.  Mammographic density and breast cancer in three ethnic groups. , 2003, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[17]  J. Weigert,et al.  The Connecticut Experiment: The Role of Ultrasound in the Screening of Women With Dense Breasts , 2012, The breast journal.

[18]  L. Tabár,et al.  Swedish two-county trial: impact of mammographic screening on breast cancer mortality during 3 decades. , 2011, Radiology.

[19]  Enzo Galligioni,et al.  Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. , 2008, European journal of cancer.

[20]  L. Liberman,et al.  Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS). , 2002, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[21]  D. Saslow,et al.  Cancer screening in the United States, 2013 , 2013, CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.

[22]  Stuart S Kaplan,et al.  Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. , 2001, Radiology.

[23]  S. Rose,et al.  Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[24]  P. Narula MAMMOGRAPHIC DENSITY AND THE RISK AND DETECTION OF BREAST CANCER , 2016 .

[25]  P. Langenberg,et al.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment. , 2000, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[26]  N. Cappello Decade of 'normal' mammography reports--the happygram. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[27]  R. Carlos,et al.  Dense breast legislation in the United States: state of the states. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR.

[28]  Anna Chiarelli,et al.  Body Size, Mammographic Density, and Breast Cancer Risk , 2006, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[29]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. , 1995, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[30]  B. Geller,et al.  A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. , 2004, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.