Only in America can we find a way to scare the bejesus out of a woman with normal breasts and a normal mammogram. But that’s exactly what happened when NY Times reporter Roni Caryn Rabin read her normal mammogram results letter –
A sentence in the fourth paragraph grabbed me by the throat. “Your breast tissue is dense.”
I can’t really blame Rabin for being afraid. The information about breast density in her mammo letter was mandatory verbiage crafted by legislators as part of a law that all women be told if they have dense breasts on mammogram.
“Your mammogram shows that your breast tissue is dense. Dense breast tissue is very common and is not abnormal. However, dense breast tissue can make it harder to find cancer on a mammogram and may also be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. This information about the result of your mammogram is given to you to raise your awareness. Use this information to talk to your doctor about your own risks for breast cancer. At that time, ask your doctor if more screening tests might be useful, based on your risk. A report of your results was sent to your physician.”
Raise awareness? More like raise the alarm. The information mandated by the law is just enough to scare any women who happens to have dense breasts, but not enough to help her understand what this really means.
If you’ve gotten a letter telling you your breasts are dense, don’t be afraid. Having dense breasts is entirely normal, especially if you are under age 60. Here’s what you need to know –
What is Breast Density?
Breast density is a radiologic assessment of how well x-rays pass through the breast tissue. It is a surrogate for how much of the breast is composed of glandular tissue and how much is fat. The radiologist reading the mammogram classifies the breast composition as one of the following –
- Almost entirely fat (<25% glandular)
- Scattered fibroglandular densities (25-50%)
- Heterogeneously dense breast tissue (51-75% glandular)
- Extremely dense (> 75% glandular)
Breast density is subjective.
Different radiologists may give the same mammogram different ratings. Use of computerized density measurement could alleviate inter-observer variability, but there is not yet a standardized computer rating system. For the purposes of the law, dense breasts are defined as those that are heterogeneously dense or extremely dense.
Breast density can vary across a woman’s menstrual cycle and over her lifetime.
The same women being scanned at a different time of month or at a later year can land into a higher or lower breast density category, and may or may not get that extra statement in her mammogram letter. Recent research suggests that a single breast density reading may not be the best way to predict breast cancer risk, and that the risk may be confined to those women whose breast density does not decrease with age.
Dense breasts are extremely common, especially in younger women.
According to a recent report of mammograms here in New York City, 74% of women in their 40s, 57% of women in their 50′s, 44% of women in their 60′s and 36% of women in their 70′s have dense breasts.
Increased breast density may be a risk factor for getting breast cancer.
The mechanism is unknown, but it may be that breast density is just the end result of other factors that increase breast cell proliferation and activity – factors like genetics and postmenopausal hormone use.
How much of a risk? Well, it depends on what study you read and who you compare to whom. If you compare the two extremes of breast density in older women, those with extremely dense breasts have a three to five-fold higher cancer risk than those with mostly fatty breast. The risk is lower than that in those in the middle category of breast density and in younger women, though not well-defined.
The truth is, we really have no way to translate individual breast density into individual risk. Researchers are trying to see if breast density can be incorporated into current risks assessments such as the Gail Model, but at this point, breast density has not been shown to add much more than we already know about a woman’s risk from using these models.
The problem with breast density as a risk factor is that most women at some point in their lives have dense breasts. Should we really consider 75% of women in their 40’s to be at increased risk for breast cancer?
I don’t think so.
Dense breasts can obscure a cancer on mammogram.
This makes mammogram less reliable in women with dense breasts. Digital mammograms may be better at finding breast cancers in women with dense breasts who are also perimenopausal or < age 50, but it is not known if this translates into better outcomes. Additional testing with ultrasound and MRI can find cancers that mammograms miss in women with dense breasts. Unfortunately, breast ultrasound and MRI screening tests are less specific than mammograms – three times as many biopsies will be done, most of which will not be cancer.
Breast cancer patients with dense breasts are not at increased risk of death.
In a study of over 9,000 women with breast cancer, no association between increased density and death from cancer was found. In fact, it was obese women with lower breast density who had the higher risk of death, possibly because their fatty breasts may be a more favorable environment for tumor growth.
We do not know if additional breast cancer screening beyond mammograms saves lives.
Sonogram and/or MRI for breast cancer screening is currently not recommended based on breast density alone. Additional screening beyond mammography is only used in women at highest risk for breast cancer – those with cancer in a first degree relative with a high risk gene mutation, a family history suggesting one of these mutations, a Gail model or other combined lifetime breast cancer risk assessment >25% or a history of chest irradiation. Even in this group, declines in morality with the additional screening have not yet been shown, and the false positive rate of this additional testing is extremely high – only 20% of abnormals are cancer when biopsied.
There are no recommendations to use sonogram and MRI in otherwise low risk women, and none that have shown that using it based on breast density alone saves lives.
Additional screening beyond mammograms adds significant costs to breast cancer screening.
For some women, this additional cost may not be covered by insurance. While Connecticut has passed a law mandating that insurers cover additional sonograms, New York State has not.
What should you do if you’ve been told your breasts are dense on mammography?
If you are at increased risk for breast cancer due to personal or family history, you may want to consider adding ultrasound or MRI screening.
Otherwise, at the point there is no recommendation that you do anything other than continue screening at whatever interval you and your doctor have decided is right for you. If you decide you want a sonogram, understand that you will need to accept the additional false positives and biopsies that may result and that the additional screening has not been shown to decrease deaths from breast cancer in women at average risk.
_________________________________________________
More info on mammograms and breast density
- Mammogram Fact Sheet from National Cancer Institute
- Breast Density Fact Sheet from the American Cancer Society
- Breast Density Info from Memorial Sloan Kettering doc Carol Lee
- www.BreastDensityInfo – a great site for docs and patients alike
Thanks for clarifying that Dr.P.
AMEN!! As a Clinical Nurse Specialist in Oncology working in collaboration with a breast radiologist I could not agree more- excellent points! Now…a very complex topic I will add these are my thoughts- and from where I sit working with cases every
1. Breast density, determined by mammography is known to be a strong and independent risk factor for breast cancer. ACS considers women with “extremely” dense breasts (less than 10% of women) to be at a moderately increased risk of cancer and recommends they talk with providers about adding MRI screening. At CDI we discuss this with each woman as related to their density so they are informed consumers. Now- her lies the problem. We DO NOT have solid standards in the US of who can read mammograms = poor outcomes, missed cancer, increased call backs all because the radiologist may be unsure of what he/she is seeing. SO breast density is SUBJECTIVE and Qualitative. Your mammogram means nothing- Who is behind your mammogram means everything. In Europe providers have to read 5000 a year to be qualified. In the US they have to read less than 1000 every two years to be qualified http://www.acr.org/News-Publications/News/News-Articles/2007/ACR-News/20070320-ACR-Study-One-in-10-Radiologists-Are-Breast-Imaging-Specialists. Dr. Wagner reads 10,000 a year in the practice I am in.
2. Yes some states have passed legislation- but it remains unclear on insurance coverage, coding, reimbursement for US used as a screening tool. And as you mentioned what a great productivity tool to raise imaging usage for women who really do not need it (hear my sarcasm?)
3. I firmly believe that density is a critical important piece of a woman’s breast health. My fear is because of the lack of consistency across the state of who is really dense and needing further evaluation we could cause unnecessary tests, expenses, and fear for women in our state.
I get the “dense breast tissue” paragraph every time from Weill Cornell Imaging. Allowing for greater cancer risk in post-menopause added to my double whammy family history, my negative BRCA results may bring me back to neutral. My small breasts are woefully squished at exam time. Surely current high res mammography can be accurate at 1/2 inch depth? I do agree with you, Carrie – one must rely on the experience and acumen of the radiologist. Further testing has never been recommended so I must be deemed below some density threshold.