NelsonHD, TyneK, NaikA, BougatsosC, ChanBK, HumphreyL; U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: An update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med, 2009; 151:727–737.
2.
HubbardRA, KerlikowskeK, FlowersCI, YankaskasBC, ZhuW, MigliorettiDL. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med, 2011; 155:481–492.
3.
AutierP, BoniolM, GavinA, VattenLJ. Breast cancer mortality in neighbouring European countries with different levels of screening but similar access to treatment: trend analysis of WHO mortality database. BMJ, 2011; 343:d4411.
4.
BleyerA, WelchHG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N Engl J Med, 2012; 367:1998–2005.
5.
EssermanL, ShiehY, ThompsonI. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer. JAMA, 2009; 302:1685–1692.
6.
WelchHG, PassowHJ. Quantifying the benefits and harms of screening mammography. JAMA Intern Med, 2014; 174:448–454.
7.
MillerAB, WallC, BainesCJ, SunP, ToT, NarodSA. Twenty-five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: randomised screening trial. BMJ, 2014; 348:g366.
8.
PisanoED, GatsonisC, HendrickE, et al; Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) Investigators Group. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med, 2005; 353:1773–1783.
9.
SpragueBL, GangnonRE, BurtV, et al.Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014; 106(10).
10.
SchousboeJT, KerlikowskeK, LohA, CummingsSR. Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med, 2011; 155:10–20.
11.
KerlikowskeK, ZhuW, TostesonAN, et al.; Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: A cohort study. Ann Intern Med, 2015; 162:673–681.
12.
CiattoS, HoussamiN, BernardiD, et al.Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): A prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol, 2013; 14:583–589.
13.
SkaaneP, BandosAI, GullienR, et al.Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology, 2013; 267:47–56.
14.
GilbertFJ, TuckerL, GillanMG, et al.The TOMMY trial: A comparison of TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY in the UK NHS Breast Screening Programme–a multicentre retrospective reading study comparing the diagnostic performance of digital breasttomosynthesis and digital mammography with digital mammography alone. Health Technol Assess, 2015; 19:i–xxv, 1–136.
15.
McCarthyAM, KontosD, SynnestvedtM, et al.Screening outcomes following implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis in a general-population screening program. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2014; 106(11).
16.
GreenbergJS, JavittMC, KatzenJ, MichaelS, HollandAE. Clinical performance metrics of 3D digital breast tomosynthesis compared with 2D digital mammography for breast cancer screening in community practice. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2014; 203:687–693.
17.
BergWA, ZhangZ, LehrerD, et al; ACRIN 6666 Investigators. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA, 2012; 307:1394–1404.
18.
SaslowD, HannanJ, OsuchJ, et al.Clinical breast examination: Practical recommendations for optimizing performance and reporting. CA Cancer J Clin, 2004; 54:327–344.
19.
GailMH, CostantinoJP, PeeD, et al.Projecting individualized absolute invasive breast cancer risk in African American women. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2007; 99:1782–1792.
