
©Pregnancy bliss 2008





Towards the end of 2007, the prestigious medical journal, the Lancet, published a report of the results of a German study comparing the efficacy of mammography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI ) in detecting early breast cancer.
At a very basic level, the difference in the efficacy of the two methods looks stark. The University of Bonn researchers reported a detection rate of 56% for the mammogram and 92% for MRI.
It is a well established fact that, breast cancer, like most cancers, has the best chance of complete cure, the earlier it is detected. There is an imperceptible threshold beyond which complete cure becomes difficult, even improbable. This is the essence of screening programs available in most developed countries, to enable early detection of lesions which are not clinically apparent. That gives the individual woman and her doctors the chance to remove the lesion. Apart from the chance of a complete cure, this helps the woman avoid extensive surgery and in some cases, debilitating additional treatment in the form of radiotherapy and chemotherapy.
A mammogram is the long-
In the UK, women aged 50 and above are given a free mammogram every three years. An invitation to have a mammogram is sent out once a woman reaches 50 and three yearly thereafter. This program is estimated to save over 1400 lives every year with an uptake of around 75% of those eligible.
Recently, there was a media and political storm on the subject in America. An NIH Consensus Conference concluded that routine mammography was not indicated universally for women in their forties. The pressure was such that the advice was reversed. Now, the official line is that women in their 40s should have a mammogram every year or two.
It is the case that a quarter of all new breast cancer cases are diagnosed in women
below the age of 50. In fact 1 in 20 will be under 40 years of age. It has been increasingly
evident that breast cancer in these younger women is likely to be due to some form
of genetic pre-
