By Brandi Watters, Herald Bulletin Staff Writer
ANDERSON — Terri Walker was just 32 years old when she was diagnosed with Stage II breast cancer.
But under a recent controversial report issued by an independent panel of medical professionals, Walker, and other women under 50, shouldn’t necessarily be getting annual mammograms.
The report from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, or USPSTF, was released earlier this month and has caused controversy among doctors who have treated thousands of women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50.
“The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms,” the report notes.
The report questions the effectiveness of women performing breast self-exams and recommends that women over 50 get screened for breast cancer every two years, not annually as is currently recommended by the American Cancer Society.
Currently the American Cancer Society recommends that women begin receiving mammograms annually at age 40. Dr. Darrel Ross, a radiation oncologist with Saint John’s Health System, said the report is “disheartening.”
The report indicates that screening women under 50 often results in false positives and may not be worth the risk of the radiation patients are exposed to during the mammogram and the unnecessary biopsies that follow.
“These are coming down to critical issues in what is the value of a human life to us and what that means,” Ross said.
Between 2000 and 2008, Ross said, 12.5 percent of all women diagnosed with breast cancer and treated at Saint John’s were under 50.
“12.5 percent is nothing to sneeze at,” he said.
Ross said women should continue to get annual mammograms beginning at age 40, despite the report’s assertion that the risk of radiation may not support it.
“There is no harm in getting a screening mammogram. There’s an exceedingly minor risk of radiation,” he said.
Kathy Creasy of Anderson had just turned 49 when she was diagnosed with Stage I breast cancer.
Creasy said she would never choose the risk of allowing her cancer to grow over the risk of radiation from a mammogram. “I think that the benefits far, far outweigh the risks.”
Ross is also concerned that the report could have implications for health care insurance coverage.
“Our concern is how this will impact insurance companies and third-party payer providers which sometimes force health care systems to operate differently because if they don’t pay for that, it’s an out-of-pocket expense.”
“If we start taking away from our younger population, you’re going to start seeing more advanced diseases later on, which increases the rate of mastectomy,” he explained.
“It’s setting the platform for something that could be very dangerous.”
Sherrie Reynolds of Noblesville is currently undergoing treatment for breast cancer at Community Hospital in Anderson.
She was diagnosed with Stage II breast cancer in August. She is 42 years old.
Reynolds said she is deeply troubled by the report and what it might mean for women.
“I was mortified. I just feel that it is beyond a disservice to women. I don’t even think you should be waiting till you’re 40. I’m living proof. If I would have ignored this, I wouldn’t have seen 50.”
“What’s sad is that uneducated women that aren’t medically-minded trust in their doctor and what the insurance companies have to say, so they may be OK with saying, ‘I won’t have to worry about a mammogram until I’m 50.’ I think it is scary,” Reynolds said.
Ross said Saint John’s will continue to offer mammograms for women under 50 despite the report.
Twice a year, the hospital offers $55 mammograms for women over 40 and those under 40 who are at high risk for breast cancer.
Contact Brandi Watters: 640-4847, brandi.watters@heraldbulletin.com
