Skip Navigation
Grant Details

Grant Number: 5P01CA154292-03 Interpret this number
Primary Investigator: Miglioretti, Diana
Organization: Group Health Cooperative
Project Title: Risk-Based Breast Cancer Screening in Community Settings
Fiscal Year: 2013
Back to top


Abstract

The program theme is to identify effective breast cancer screening strategies for women with diverse levels of breast cancer risk to maximize screening benefits while minimizing potential harms. Program aims follow the premise that breast cancer screening will be most effective when: guidelines are based on accurate risk estimates that are tied to the effectiveness and harms of screening tests; women and physicians are informed about screening test performance based on risk level; risk-based screening practices are equitable; and high-quality comparative effectiveness research results are disseminated into community practice. Program goals will be met through three complementary research projects and three shared resource cores. Project 1, Risk Assessment in Community Practice: Developing Better Models, will improve prediction of breast cancer and breast cancer subtypes among women of varying ages and race/ethnicity and evaluate whether predicted risk can be used to optimize screening outcomes. Project 2, Comparative Effectiveness of Imaging Strategies for Breast Cancer Screening in Community Practice, will characterize the performance of advanced imaging technologies and screening strategies according to age, race/ethnicity, breast density, and overall breast cancer risk. Project 3, Community-based Utilization of Breast Imaging Technologies, will assess risk-based screening in diverse populations and identify disparities in access and use of new technologies. The Administrative Core will support logistical requirements and facilitate communication and data sharing. The Biostatistics and Data Management Core will coordinate data collection, management, and analysis and will develop statistical methods. The Comparative Effectiveness Core will use simulation modeling to estimate long-term implications of different screening practices on population health. The program represents an integrated effort to improve screening with the overall aim of averting deaths from breast cancer while minimizing harms.

Back to top


Publications

Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study.
Authors: Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, Sprague BL, Tice JA, Lehman CD, Miglioretti DL, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium
Source: Ann Intern Med, 2015 May 19;162(10), p. 673-81.
PMID: 25984843
Related Citations

Back to top


Predictors of preoperative MRI for breast cancer: differences by data source.
Authors: Loggers ET, Gao H, Gold LS, Kessler L, Etzioni R, Buist DS, ADVICE Investigators
Source: J Comp Eff Res, 2015 May 11;null, p. 1-12.
EPub date: 2015 May 11.
PMID: 25960128
Related Citations

Back to top


Variation in Breast Cancer-Risk Factor Associations by Method of Detection: Results From a Series of Case-Control Studies.
Authors: Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Hampton JM, Egan KM, Titus LJ, Kerlikowske K, Remington PL, Newcomb PA, Trentham-Dietz A
Source: Am J Epidemiol, 2015 Jun 15;181(12), p. 956-69.
EPub date: 2015 May 5.
PMID: 25944893
Related Citations

Back to top


Comparing sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography in the United States and Denmark.
Authors: Kemp Jacobsen K, O'Meara ES, Key D, S M Buist D, Kerlikowske K, Vejborg I, Sprague BL, Lynge E, von Euler-Chelpin M
Source: Int J Cancer, 2015 May 5;null, p. null.
EPub date: 2015 May 5.
PMID: 25944711
Related Citations

Back to top


Five-year risk of interval-invasive second breast cancer.
Authors: Lee JM, Buist DS, Houssami N, Dowling EC, Halpern EF, Gazelle GS, Lehman CD, Henderson LM, Hubbard RA
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015 Jul;107(7), p. null.
EPub date: 2015 Apr 22.
PMID: 25904721
Related Citations

Back to top


Advanced Breast Imaging Availability by Screening Facility Characteristics.
Authors: Lee CI, Bogart A, Hubbard RA, Obadina ET, Hill DA, Haas JS, Tosteson AN, Alford-Teaster JA, Sprague BL, DeMartini WB, Lehman CD, Onega TL
Source: Acad Radiol, 2015 Jul;22(7), p. 846-52.
EPub date: 2015 Apr 4.
PMID: 25851643
Related Citations

Back to top


One versus Two Breast Density Measures to Predict 5- and 10-Year Breast Cancer Risk.
Authors: Kerlikowske K, Gard CC, Sprague BL, Tice JA, Miglioretti DL, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium
Source: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2015 Jun;24(6), p. 889-97.
EPub date: 2015 Mar 30.
PMID: 25824444
Related Citations

Back to top


Criteria for identifying radiologists with acceptable screening mammography interpretive performance on basis of multiple performance measures.
Authors: Miglioretti DL, Ichikawa L, Smith RA, Bassett LW, Feig SA, Monsees B, Parikh JR, Rosenberg RD, Sickles EA, Carney PA
Source: AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2015 Apr;204(4), p. W486-91.
PMID: 25794100
Related Citations

Back to top


Do mammographic technologists affect radiologists' diagnostic mammography interpretative performance?
Authors: Henderson LM, Benefield T, Bowling JM, Durham DD, Marsh MW, Schroeder BF, Yankaskas BC
Source: AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2015 Apr;204(4), p. 903-8.
PMID: 25794085
Related Citations

Back to top


The contribution of mammography screening to breast cancer incidence trends in the United States: an updated age-period-cohort model.
Authors: Gangnon RE, Sprague BL, Stout NK, Alagoz O, Weedon-Fekjśr H, Holford TR, Trentham-Dietz A
Source: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2015 Jun;24(6), p. 905-12.
EPub date: 2015 Mar 18.
PMID: 25787716
Related Citations

Back to top


The contributions of breast density and common genetic variation to breast cancer risk.
Authors: Vachon CM, Pankratz VS, Scott CG, Haeberle L, Ziv E, Jensen MR, Brandt KR, Whaley DH, Olson JE, Heusinger K, Hack CC, Jud SM, Beckmann MW, Schulz-Wendtland R, Tice JA, Norman AD, Cunningham JM, Purrington KS, Easton DF, Sellers TA, Kerlikowske K, Fasching PA, Couch FJ
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2015 May;107(5), p. null.
EPub date: 2015 Mar 4.
PMID: 25745020
Related Citations

Back to top


Comparison of false positive rates for screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in high risk women performed on stacked versus alternating schedules.
Authors: Othman E, Wang J, Sprague BL, Rounds T, Ji Y, Herschorn SD, Wood ME
Source: Springerplus, 2015;4, p. 77.
EPub date: 2015 Feb 13.
PMID: 25741458
Related Citations

Back to top


Dense and nondense mammographic area and risk of breast cancer by age and tumor characteristics.
Authors: Bertrand KA, Scott CG, Tamimi RM, Jensen MR, Pankratz VS, Norman AD, Visscher DW, Couch FJ, Shepherd J, Chen YY, Fan B, Wu FF, Ma L, Beck AH, Cummings SR, Kerlikowske K, Vachon CM
Source: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 2015 May;24(5), p. 798-809.
EPub date: 2015 Feb 25.
PMID: 25716949
Related Citations

Back to top


Using natural language processing to extract mammographic findings.
Authors: Gao H, Aiello Bowles EJ, Carrell D, Buist DS
Source: J Biomed Inform, 2015 Apr;54, p. 77-84.
EPub date: 2015 Feb 3.
PMID: 25661260
Related Citations

Back to top


Performance of digital screening mammography among older women in the United States.
Authors: Henderson LM, O'Meara ES, Braithwaite D, Onega T, Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium
Source: Cancer, 2015 May 1;121(9), p. 1379-86.
EPub date: 2014 Dec 23.
PMID: 25537958
Related Citations

Back to top


Benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of supplemental ultrasonography screening for women with dense breasts.
Authors: Sprague BL, Stout NK, Schechter C, van Ravesteyn NT, Cevik M, Alagoz O, Lee CI, van den Broek JJ, Miglioretti DL, Mandelblatt JS, de Koning HJ, Kerlikowske K, Lehman CD, Tosteson AN
Source: Ann Intern Med, 2015 Feb 3;162(3), p. 157-66.
PMID: 25486550
Related Citations

Back to top


The influence of mammographic technologists on radiologists' ability to interpret screening mammograms in community practice.
Authors: Henderson LM, Benefield T, Marsh MW, Schroeder BF, Durham DD, Yankaskas BC, Bowling JM
Source: Acad Radiol, 2015 Mar;22(3), p. 278-89.
EPub date: 2014 Nov 27.
PMID: 25435185
Related Citations

Back to top


Breast cancer detection with short-interval follow-up compared with return to annual screening in patients with benign stereotactic or US-guided breast biopsy results.
Authors: Johnson JM, Johnson AK, O'Meara ES, Miglioretti DL, Geller BM, Hotaling EN, Herschorn SD
Source: Radiology, 2015 Apr;275(1), p. 54-60.
EPub date: 2014 Nov 25.
PMID: 25423143
Related Citations

Back to top


Comparative effectiveness of combined digital mammography and tomosynthesis screening for women with dense breasts.
Authors: Lee CI, Cevik M, Alagoz O, Sprague BL, Tosteson AN, Miglioretti DL, Kerlikowske K, Stout NK, Jarvik JG, Ramsey SD, Lehman CD
Source: Radiology, 2015 Mar;274(3), p. 772-80.
EPub date: 2014 Oct 28.
PMID: 25350548
Related Citations

Back to top


Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States.
Authors: Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V, Trentham-Dietz A, Hampton JM, Wellman RD, Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014 Oct;106(10), p. null.
EPub date: 2014 Sep 12.
PMID: 25217577
Related Citations

Back to top


Breast MRI BI-RADS assessments and abnormal interpretation rates by clinical indication in US community practices.
Authors: Lee CI, Ichikawa L, Rochelle MC, Kerlikowske K, Miglioretti DL, Sprague BL, DeMartini WB, Wernli KJ, Joe BN, Yankaskas BC, Lehman CD
Source: Acad Radiol, 2014 Nov;21(11), p. 1370-6.
EPub date: 2014 Aug 7.
PMID: 25126973
Related Citations

Back to top


Higher mammography screening costs without appreciable clinical benefit: the case of digital mammography.
Authors: Kerlikowske K, Hubbard R, Tosteson AN
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014 Aug;106(8), p. null.
EPub date: 2014 Jul 16.
PMID: 25031310
Related Citations

Back to top


Personalizing age of cancer screening cessation based on comorbid conditions: model estimates of harms and benefits.
Authors: Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Gulati R, Mariotto AB, Schechter CB, de Carvalho TM, Knudsen AB, van Ravesteyn NT, Heijnsdijk EA, Pabiniak C, van Ballegooijen M, Rutter CM, Kuntz KM, Feuer EJ, Etzioni R, de Koning HJ, Zauber AG, Mandelblatt JS
Source: Ann Intern Med, 2014 Jul 15;161(2), p. 104-12.
PMID: 25023249
Related Citations

Back to top


Screening ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography in women with mammographically dense breasts.
Authors: Scheel JR, Lee JM, Sprague BL, Lee CI, Lehman CD
Source: Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2015 Jan;212(1), p. 9-17.
EPub date: 2014 Jun 21.
PMID: 24959654
Related Citations

Back to top


Changes in breast cancer risk distribution among Vermont women using screening mammography.
Authors: Bolton KC, Mace JL, Vacek PM, Herschorn SD, James TA, Tice JA, Kerlikowske K, Geller BM, Weaver DL, Sprague BL
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014 Aug;106(8), p. null.
EPub date: 2014 Jun 23.
PMID: 24957223
Related Citations

Back to top


Geographic access to breast imaging for US women.
Authors: Onega T, Hubbard R, Hill D, Lee CI, Haas JS, Carlos HA, Alford-Teaster J, Bogart A, DeMartini WB, Kerlikowske K, Virnig BA, Buist DS, Henderson L, Tosteson AN
Source: J Am Coll Radiol, 2014 Sep;11(9), p. 874-82.
EPub date: 2014 Jun 2.
PMID: 24889479
Related Citations

Back to top


Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography.
Authors: Stout NK, Lee SJ, Schechter CB, Kerlikowske K, Alagoz O, Berry D, Buist DS, Cevik M, Chisholm G, de Koning HJ, Huang H, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, Munsell MF, Trentham-Dietz A, van Ravesteyn NT, Tosteson AN, Mandelblatt JS
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014 Jun;106(6), p. dju092.
EPub date: 2014 May 28.
PMID: 24872543
Related Citations