You won't get anything if you get a mammogram every year. I would ask him to express why he said that.

They say 1 in 8 women get it, that’s 12.5% so you’re ahead of the game!

"You won't get anything if you get a mammogram every year."

I don't understand your comment, yayagal. I reads (to me) like you are saying that a mamogram will prevent breast cancer. Of course that's not true. Would you clearify, please?

Perhaps one in eight are diagnosed with a cancer, but is it really cancer or just an abnormality that could become cancerous? When I hear that X number of women are 'cancer survivors' I wonder how many were cured of some 'possible' cancer, and at what cost (dollars and fear). Maybe this field has improved, torturing fewer women with unnecessary tests and procedures than I experienced. Hospitals have a lot of money invested in equipment that needs to be profitable.

Anyway, it sounds like a good report for you, Annie, and that is indeed a good thing.

I was just really surprised by the percentage right there. Yes, under 12.5 %. No history of breast cancer in my family. It must be very scary indeed for women who get a higher percent number.

Did your reading say you have dense breast tissue? My results have said that for several years and it can be a risk factor. Since I started getting the 3D m’grams, that risk goes down as the screening view is much improved. Plus i do not have family history.

I had one in November. I just went back and looked at the report on my results. There is no mention of a percentage of getting breast cancer. I would ask your physician about it if you are curious.

OutsidePlaying--thanks for info. Yes to the dense breast tissue! I wonder if my insurance will pay for a 3D mammogram. I will ask my doctor. Thanks a bunch for the info.

Apparently I had the 3D screening--I just checked my prescription. I didn't know what the word tomosynthesis meant. So, I'm relieved.

Don't let the percentage stress you out. My doctor told me I have little chance getting breast cancer. No more than the general public. I get a mamogram every year just in case.

My mother had it and had a radical mastectomy and my twin sister was diagnosed with it a year ago and had the lump removed. The reason they are not worried is both were past 70YO. They would be more worried if they had been 50YO or younger. My mom lived 23 years after the treatment to the age of 93.

I had my most recent mammogram last week and received the report today. There was no mention of a percentage - not on this one or on any of my previous mammograms. I would definitely call your doctor for an explanation.

Is where I live the only place that does this? When you have a questionable mammogram, they have you come back and they do one again, and if they find a spot that seems suspect, they do a more definitive one while you're there. They delve and delve and delve until they have figured out what is going on. I've never been given a percent. But I've been told my mammogram was suspicious, and given more definitive mammograms after that. Mammograms read by the radiologist at that moment. I haven't needed to do that in a long time.

So maybe 3D is now the definitive way to do it. It does seem like they give you a choice if that's what you prefer. I didn't prefer it, since the last time they ran one mine was clean. And this time it was too.

I wish you the best of luck however it turns out. Sounds like there are multiple ways to address this. HUGS!

That is very strange. I have received a % risk score for getting breast cancer in the next five years, but it is is part of a clinical study (Wisdom Study) and it includes evaluation of genetics and family history, not just the results of one mammogram. Does your chance say over what time period you have that risk? Risk increases as the period of time considered gets longer.

Wisdom Study

(((LadyPat)))

Anne, I too have dense breasts, I get the 3D and a sonogram every year.

The pictures are shown to the doctor. If anything needs to be repeated, it happens then.

I walk out with a report of my results. They are also send me a copy.

Ladypat - good explanation.

Annie - it appears your 10.7% risk factor is good news.

I have never noticed a risk factor on my mammogram report. I think they are supposed to note breast density grade on the report. Keep in mind that the current recommendation if you are over 55 is for a mammogram every two years rather than annually.

Also, please note that ’anti-cancer drugs’ which I presume means hormone therapy (tamoxifin or aromatase inhibitor) are not risk free and one side effect of aromatase inhibitors is osteopenia or osteoporosis. Is it worth risking a broken hip or DVT or uterine cancer (from Tamoxifin) in an effort to prevent a cancer that you may or may not get? Each individual has to weigh the benefit vs. risk.

Some ’in situ’ carcinomas are now considered pre-cancers rather than an actual cancer. Atypical cells may confer a slight increased risk of breast cancer but it doesnt mean you will definitely get breast cancer. Breast cancer is BIG $$$$ business so over diagnosis and over treatment are a real thing as medical centers are looking to maximize revenue.

I was diagnosed with invasive breast cancer three years ago and discovered I have a genetic mutation for breast and ovarian cancer. Surgery, radiation and medication followed. Honestly, my treatment was a clown show of errors with poorly trained personnel and lack of communication among my doctors at a major medical center in Chicago. With such poor quality care, I don‘t see a benefit to mammograms. I haven't had a mammogram in 2.5 years and don't know if or when I will.

I urge all women to consider if regular mammograms are necessary and if so, how often. With all the ’pink’ marketing directed at women, particularly in October, women are being subjected to scare tactics and in some cases having more treatment than needed.

It was the inconvenience, not a conscious dismissal, of getting regular mammograms that caused my wife to skip a few years. She was rewarded with stage 3 cancer and it’s not been a fun ride. I compare what she’s gone through with the several women I know who’ve caught things early, had lumpectomies and called it a day, and I can’t imagine wanting or agreeing to less frequent screening. Bothers me that my colonoscopies are only once every five years.

I hate the side effects of her preventative therapies now and have often found myself wondering if they’re really statistically justified, but that’s between her and her doctors.

You should question it. I have never seen that ever. I could understand if it was the result of a genetic test. Do you have ultrasounds done as well? I am very sensitive to this, having been diagnosed at 38 when I went for my very first mammogram, just to get a baseline, at the advice of my then OBGYN, who unknowingly saved my life. He said that I was close enough to 40, which was the protocol. A mastectomy, chemo, radiation and Tamoxifen, and here I am 32 years later! I was lucky, but I know too many people who were not.

You’ve never see what?

There is a HUGE misconception that mammograms prevent breast cancer. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Source: my breast cancer was found by a routine mammogram. My mother's breast cancer was found by a routine mammogram.

There is also a HUGE misconception that breast cancer is a "good" cancer to get - because it's "so common" and "treatable" and some even think it's "cure-able."

A percentage assessment of risk coming off a mammogram report. It makes no sense to me, but maybe I'm an idiot.

Ah ok. i thoufht you wetr referring to the side effects mentioned in my post.

Lola, I’ve literally never heard anyone say, suggest, or so much as ask about mammograms preventing breast cancer. I’m curious where this misconception is.

Risk assessment percentage? There are a couple ways that is calculated.

Here’s one.

“Risk assessment tools are designed to quantify a patient's risk for breast cancer, and thus can assist in the decision on whether or not to refer a patient for genetics counselling and/or whether or not to pursue a workup for inherited cancer syndromes. Several risk assessment tools exist. In general, these tools elicit information about factors that epidemiologic studies have identified as associated with increased risk, including the likelihood of BRCA mutations, such as the following:

• Breast cancer diagnosis before age 50 years
• Bilateral breast cancer
• Presence of breast and ovarian cancer
• Presence of breast cancer in 1 or more male family members
• Multiple cases of breast cancer in the family
• One or more family members with 2 primary types of BRCA-related cancer
• Ashkenazi Jewish ethnicity”

More info here:

https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1945957-overview#a10

I wouldn't worry about the percentage since it is low but ask if it concerns you so you dont fret about it. Why not?

As for mammograms, they have their use and while inconvenient not the end of the world to go through them. I would say most importantly that they do not catch all breast cancers and self examination is part of the protocol. Women frequently catch lumps that mammograms miss. If you test positive for any of the genetic markers for heaven sakes keep getting your tests. If your care after finding you have cancer is subpar go elsewhere but do go. Cancer care evolves and new treatments work better.

Seems like a good time to say, men can also get breast cancer. I wish the stigma attached to saying this would disappear. It does happen. 1 out of a 100 cases is male. (Myth #10 in the below)

I would be interested to hear what they say when you ask why a percentage was attached. I think most groups would want it to be clear why they were doing that, with the least amount of stress to the patient as possible. It has you here questioning, for instance. Were they trying to reassure you? Make sure you keep coming back? Should be at a higher notice for you? What was their objective? That's all. I would think they would want to inform you, without upsetting you.

It's a well-known and frequently spread myth. I heard it just this morning on my local news, when they were doing a story about a mobile mammography van.

https://www.stopbreastcancer.org/information-center/myths-truths/#:~:text=Except%20for%20growing%20older%20and,that%20mammograms%20prevent%20breast%20cancer.

(Expand item #8)

I get both the mammogram and ultrasound every year because mine are dense (I prefer to think of them as "firm."). Medicare pays for both. I always thought I was safer because I've been blessed with small breasts. I think it probably makes self exam easier, but being small is no guarantee of avoiding cancer. Tig Notaro was even flatter than me. She turned getting breast cancer into a funny bit in her act. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW3i9cU96OU

This last mammogram in August had been the biggest lapse between and that was two years. Normally I do yearly since my 50s and maybe earlier., I can't remember. Nothing was ever noted about statistics , just noting dense breasts and no family history.

My mother died from metastatic breast cancer (she was first diagnosed when she was 48, and died when she was 53), as did her only sibling - her older sister. There is a history of breast cancer on my maternal side, and after my mother had a radical mastectomy I always thought it was a matter of "when" not "if" I would end up with breast cancer. I have had two lumps removed, one from each breast, several years apart, but both were benign. Three years ago my younger sister was diagnosed with breast cancer after her routine annual mammogram. They removed the lump and the margins were clear. For years "they" said that if a woman hasn't carried a pregnancy to term by the age of 30 that she was at a higher risk of eventually developing breast cancer. I've had multiple miscarriages, but never a successful pregnancy. So, with my family history and two first-degree relatives with breast cancer, I'm supposedly at a much higher risk than the "average woman." But, my mammogram reports, although they mention my family history and first-degree relatives, have never mentioned any percentage of risk for me.

(((Lindsey)))

I was going to comment on that from the view from the genetics world (my work world). Having BRCA doesn't guarantee having breast cancer, for instance. There are no guarantees. One's environment can affect health negatively or positively, even seemingly overriding genetics.

When one is prone to these issues, it's good to watch, but don't be so worried that you get carried away.

Remember when people were having breast removal as a prophylactic measure?! That horrified me. It might not have ever happened, so why remove that body part? Oh well. To each their own.

Having both breasts removed is INSURANCE. I'd gladly have had a bilateral mastectomy PRIOR TO diagnosis, to save a lot of crap I went through with the cancer. It's not horrifying to me - it's life-preserving. I'd rather be flat-chested (which I am, since I had a bilateral mastectomy as part of my treatment) and ALIVE.

My daughter was diagnosed at her first mammogram on her 40th birthday. No symptoms, no family history. My husband was diagnosed with stage 4 esophageal cancer at age 66. No symptoms, no family history. I was diagnosed with stage 3B colon cancer at age 65. No symptoms, no family history. This was in a span of 4 years. We all had genetic testing. No connections anywhere.

My daughter was put on Tamoxifen after lumpectomy, chemo, and radiation. It damaged her liver and caused major weight gain. She was changed to a different drug (whose name escapes me, but is a monthly injection) with no improvement. Finally, a new NP suggested a hysterectomy that would allow her to stop the drugs. She is a teacher, so she is scheduled for surgery over summer break. She is only 46. Hopefully, she will regain her health.

After having a large portion of my colon removed and undergoing chemo, I have had abnormal nodes and lesions show up in my breasts, liver, and lungs. Further scanning and MRI's show they are holding steady and are nothing to worry about. Fingers crossed.

I am telling our story to encourage everyone to undergo all available testing on a regular basis. It is extremely important. Daughter and I are still here. Husband, unfortunately, is not.

As has been mentioned, theTyrer-Cuzick Risk Model (IBIS Breast Cancer Risk Evaluation Tool) is a risk calculator used to determine lifetime breast cancer risk. Many metrics are used to come up with this number that most mammogram places would not know. It is a fairly lengthy questionaire asking weight, age of menarche, pregnancy history, family history, etc.

I am a 5 yr survivor. I have 2 daughters,, one of whom is high risk due to being overweight, family history of myself and her paternal grandmother having BC, and the fact she has never been pregnant. She is in the low 30 % for lifetime risk for breast cancer. At greater than 30% risk, insurance pays for all associated costs of early surveillance and screening. My other daughter has a much lower risk due to late menarche, pregnancy x 2, and normal BMI.

The calculator is available at this site if one is interested.

FOAS, I wish your family well as you travel this awful path.

Lola - thank you for the link which contains excellent info. There is so much misinformation surrounding breast cancer (and probably many other diseases)

FOAS and Lindsey - my sympathies on your situations.

Rob - ”Remember when people were having breast removal as a prophylactic measure?” This is still happening. The recommendation is for prophylactic removal of breasts and ovaries if you have the BRCA mutation which carries up to a 60-80% chance of breast cancer. I’m on a breast cancer forum and I’ve read stories of women having a prophylactic mastectomy for only atypical cells and no genetic mutation. I guess if you look hard enough you can find a surgeon who will do the surgery.

On the other hand, once you are on Medicare, its unlikely (but not impossible) that it will cover prophylactic surgeries. My surgeon refused to consider a mastectomy when I was diagnosed and I foolishly allowed her to push me into having two lumpectomies PRIOR to getting the results of genetic testing because she advised that genetic mutations are rare and she was ’sure’ I didn’t have a mutation in spite of my very strong family history. Turns out she was wrong. I do not have the BRCA mutation but there are about a dozen other mutations of which I have one. I was diagnosed at the height of Covid so any further surgery was not possible. I’ve since retired and am on Medicare so further surgeries for breasts and ovaries are likely not covered.

Bottom line is that each person must decide for themselves (in conjunction with their doctor) on the best course of action.

Anne - If you need further clarification on the risk factor on your report, I encourage you to reach out to your doctor for an explanation.

There isnt just one form of breast cancer of course and it really matters what kind you get or are more likely to get and your family history as to what you do.

That lists of truths and myths are either or things and life isnt like that. As in self exam doesnt rule out mammograms. It is in addition to and clean mammograms doesnt rule out self exam. A lump found on self exam doesnt mean you have cancer it means you have a lump that needs to be looked at professionally which also doesnt mean a biopsy. I havent had breast cancer but I did have Ovarian cancer at a very young age and I had a sister who was told she had some ovarian cancer when she had surgery for some other unidentified non-cancerous mass (she didnt ask) so my other two sisters were alarmed and talked to their doctors and neither suggested chopping out their insides but went with extra vigilance. Years later having the option of genetic testing I had it done and mine does not have the known genetic causes but that doesnt mean it is not genetic. See how that works? When I was diagnosed with ovarian cancer I was told that there was a greatly increased chance of breast cancer for me but at the time they did not know why. So now they do and I am not in that known risk class. The parameters evolve and the treatments evolve.

We had zero cancers of any type in our family, going back to my grandparents, who were all born in the 1880's. My risk, before diagnosis, according to the rubric, would have been none. I have not had genetic testing; both both daughters did, and they do not carry the gene. All any of us can do is get tested on a regular basis.

I have had genetic testing done, due to my sister being diagnosed with breast cancer at age 39. While negative for the BRCA gene, and while I wasn't given a specific percentage, my doctor told me the genetic testing showed an "extremely high" lifetime risk of developing it. By the time she got diagnosed, I had already had 2 mammograms, 4 ultrasounds and a biopsy done, which turned out fine. There were concerns on my baseline mammogram that I got when I turned 35. Since then I have been ordered to have yearly mammograms AND follow up ultrasounds just in case. I just turned 39.

My sisters cancer tested negative for genetic markers, and the first case of breast cancer in our family was a maternal aunt, who was diagnosed and passed in her late 50s from it. Her cancer also tested negative for genetic markers.

Even though my testing showed an extremely high risk, I do not worry too much about it. I try to be healthy. I exercise a lot, eat relatively healthy and drink a lot of green tea. I do what I am told by my doctors as far as screening and lifestyle habits, and that is all one can do.