screening

More spending on breast cancer screening doesn't improve detection rates

Thursday, January 17, 2013 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer
Tags: breast cancer, detection, spending

eTrust Pro Certified

Most Viewed Articles
Popular on Facebook
White House admits staging fake vaccination operation to gather DNA from the public
EXCLUSIVE: Natural News tests flu vaccine for heavy metals, finds 25,000 times higher mercury level than EPA limit for water
Irrefutable proof we are all being sprayed with poison: 571 tons of toxic lead 'chemtrailed' into America's skies every year
Truvia sweetener a powerful pesticide; scientists shocked as fruit flies die in less than a week from eating GMO-derived erythritol
Russia taking McDonald's to court, threatens countrywide shutdown
Why does the CDC own a patent on Ebola 'invention?'
Senator who attacked Doctor Oz over dietary supplements received over $146,000 in campaign contributions from Big Pharma mega-retailer and Monsanto
Global warming data FAKED by government to fit climate change fictions
Oregon man serving prison sentence for collecting rainwater on his own property
HOAX confirmed: Michelle Obama 'GMOs for children' campaign a parody of modern agricultural politics
Ebola outbreak may already be uncontrollable; Monsanto invests in Ebola treatment drug company as pandemic spreads
Ben & Jerry's switches to non-GMO, Fair Trade ice cream ingredients
Diet soda, aspartame linked to premature deaths in women
Elliot Rodger, like nearly all young killers, was taking psychiatric drugs (Xanax)
Right to farm being stripped from Americans: Michigan to criminalize small family farms with chickens, goats, honey bees and more
BREAKING: CDC whistleblower confesses to MMR vaccine research fraud in historic public statement
Monsanto's seed imperialism halted in Canada thanks to massive protests
5 powerful antibiotics that don't require a prescription
Delicious
(NaturalNews) New and expensive breast cancer screening techniques do not appear to provide greater health benefits to women than older, less expensive techniques, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Yale School of Medicine and published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine.

The researchers calculated spending on breast cancer screening and treatment in 137,274 female Medicare beneficiaries who had not been diagnosed with breast cancer by 2006. All participants were followed for two years, during which time their breast cancer screening, incidence and costs were recorded.

The researchers found that Medicare spends just over $1 billion per year on screening for breast cancer, nearly equaling the $1.36 billion that it spends on treating the disease. According to lead researcher Cary Gross, the researchers had not expected screening costs to be nearly so high.

"It should be a call to do further research to identify the best screening strategy," Gross said. "If we're spending more, does it really help the patients?"

The researchers also found that the amount of money that Medicare spends on breast cancer screening varied dramatically by region of the country, ranging from $40 to $110 per beneficiary. The bulk of the difference was accounted for by differing use of newer and more expensive screening techniques.

"You could argue when it comes to screening, that if you invest more in screening, maybe you'll spend less in treatment," Gross said. "But we didn't find that."

"There was no evidence that higher expenditures were benefiting women living in the high-cost regions," Gross said. "Specifically, there was no relation between screening expenditures and the detection of advanced cancers."

And although the United States Preventive Services Task Force no longer recommends screening women over the age of 74 for breast cancer, Medicare continues to spend more than $400 million each year screening that population.

Lack of data

In recent years, health professionals have increasingly raised concern over the negative effects of excessive breast cancer screening, from the trauma and unnecessary procedures associated with false positives to the dangers of increased radiation exposure.

"We need further studies to identify which women will benefit from screening, and how to screen effectively and efficiently," said Gross. "In some instances, breast cancer screening can save lives. But no woman wants to undergo testing if it is likely to cause more harm than good, and no health system - particularly ours - can afford to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on screening programs without evidence to support them."

John Hugg of the Vanderbilt Breast Clinic, who was not involved in the study, said that the problem is not over-screening, but rather that modern screening is too imprecise.

"There are some breast cancers that might not need aggressive treatment, but we unfortunately are currently unable to identify which ones they are," Huff said. "So it's nice to say we might be over-diagnosing or over-treating, but until we have evidence that helps us understand which people those are, it's hard to separate those out as a group. So we're left being a little less targeted."

(Natural News Science)

Sources for this article include:http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-01/yu-cbc010413.php ;http://abcnews.go.com

Join over four million monthly readers. Your privacy is protected. Unsubscribe at any time.
comments powered by Disqus
Take Action: Support NaturalNews.com by linking back to this article from your website

Permalink to this article:

Embed article link: (copy HTML code below):

Reprinting this article:
Non-commercial use OK, cite NaturalNews.com with clickable link.

Follow Natural News on Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, and Pinterest

Colloidal Silver

Advertise with NaturalNews...

Support NaturalNews Sponsors:

Advertise with NaturalNews...

GET SHOW DETAILS
+ a FREE GIFT

Sign up for the FREE Natural News Email Newsletter

Receive breaking news on GMOs, vaccines, fluoride, radiation protection, natural cures, food safety alerts and interviews with the world's top experts on natural health and more.

Join over 7 million monthly readers of NaturalNews.com, the internet's No. 1 natural health news site. (Source: Alexa.com)

Your email address *

Please enter the code you see above*

No Thanks

Already have it and love it!

Natural News supports and helps fund these organizations:

* Required. Once you click submit, we will send you an email asking you to confirm your free registration. Your privacy is assured and your information is kept confidential. You may unsubscribe at anytime.