U.S. Doctors Conduct More Breast Cancer Tests But Don't Detect More Cancer

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Women in the U.S. may be subjected to unnecessary tests following a mammogram, according to the results of a new study. Researchers writing today in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) report that American women are recalled for further tests, such as biopsies, twice as often as their British counterparts. Yet breast cancer detection rates in the U.S. and the U.K. are about the same.

Rebecca Smith-Bindman of the University of California at San Francisco and her colleagues looked at data on women ages 50 and older in the U.S. and Britain who underwent 5.5 million mammograms over a four-year period. Of these women, 27, 612 were diagnosed with breast cancer within 12 months of being screened.

The team believes that the lower recall rates in the U.K. can be attributed in part to the centralization of British screening--the National Health Service runs a program that provides nearly all mammographic examinations for women aged 50 and up. Also, the threat of malpractice lawsuits in the U.S. may make American radiologists overly cautious.


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.


"Screening women aged 50 to 69 years biennially and reducing recall rates could substantially decrease the cost of mammography, as well as associated anxiety caused by false-positive diagnoses," the authors write. "Efforts to improve U.S. mammographic screening should be targeted to lowering the recall rate without substantially lowering the cancer detection rate." --Kate Wong

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