New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

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

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe