U.S. Panel Finalizes Breast Cancer Screening Recommendations

Group reaffirms controversial stance that mammograms should start routinely at age 50

©iStock.com

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Andrew Seaman

An influential panel of U.S. experts issued final recommendations on Monday reaffirming their controversial position that mammogram screening should start at age 50, but also said some women may benefit from screening starting at age 40.

Under the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines, mammogram screening every two years for women 50 to 74 got a grade of "B", meaning doctors should offer the service. Screening for women in their 40s got a "C" grade, meaning doctors should offer the service for select patients, depending on individual circumstances.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Critics have stressed that keeping 50 as the starting age for screening could threaten insurance coverage for millions of women aged 40 to 49. That is because insurers are not required to cover screening for women in their 40s, according to provisions in the Affordable Care Act.

Lawmakers, however, have already weighed in, adding an amendment to the 2016 U.S. spending bill that guarantees coverage for mammograms for women starting at age 40 through 2018.

Debate over the proper age at which doctors should start offering screening mammograms has raged since the task force first issued its recommendation in 2009. At the time, the panel cited evidence showing that the harm from over screening outweighed the benefits in cancer prevention.

Since that time, the task force has maintained that 50 is the best age to start routine screening. But it has left the door open for individuals who might benefit from screening starting at age 40.

"The task force believes that the science supports a range of individual choices for women to make for when to start screening, all the way from starting at age 40 or waiting until age 50, or anywhere in-between," said Dr. Michael LeFevre of the University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, former chair of the government-backed panel.

The new, more inclusive wording of the guidelines is more in line with new recommendations from other cancer groups, such as the American Cancer Society. The society released new breast cancer screening guidelines in October pushing back the starting age for screening mammograms to 45 from 40, and recommending that younger women should have the choice to start screening as early as 40.

Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society, said he is happy with the Task Force's conclusions.

"We all recognize that the patient should be empowered and the patient should control her own body," he said.

According to the task force, screening 10,000 women in their 50s will result in eight fewer deaths, versus four fewer deaths for women who start screening at age 40.

Possible harms of breast cancer screening include unnecessary treatment for potentially harmless forms of breast cancer, incorrect results known as false positives and unnecessary additional testing.

    As long as women understand the balance between benefits and harms, they can make a reasonable decision to start screening anytime in their 40s, LeFevre said.

Women with mothers or sisters with a history of breast cancer may benefit more from screening in their 40s, according to the task force.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe