Cost-effectiveness of radioguided occult lesion localization using 125I seeds versus hookwire localization before breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness of radioguided occult lesion localization using 125I-labelled seeds (125I seeds) versus hookwire localization in terms of incremental cost per reoperation avoided for women with non-palpable breast cancer undergoing breast-conserving surgery. METHODS: This study was based on a multicentre RCT with eight study sites comprising seven public hospitals and one private hospital. An Australian public health system perspective was taken. The primary effectiveness outcome for this study was reoperations avoided. Cost-effectiveness was expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to explore uncertainty. The willingness to pay (additional cost of localization using 125I seeds justified by reoperation cost avoided) was set at the weighted, top-down cost of reoperation. Costs were in 2019 Australian dollars ($1 was equivalent to €0.62). RESULTS: The reoperation rate was 13.9 (95 per cent confidence interval 10.7 to 18.0) per cent for the 125I seed group and 18.9 (14.8 to 23.8) per cent for the hookwire localization group. The ICER for 125I seed versus hookwire localization was $4474 per reoperation averted. The results were most sensitive to uncertainty around the probability of reoperation. Accounting for transition probability and cost uncertainty for 125I seed localization, there was a 77 per cent probability that using 125I seeds would be cost-effective, with a willingness to pay of $7693 per reoperation averted. CONCLUSION: Radioguided occult lesion localization using 125I seeds is likely to be cost-effective, because the marginal (additional) cost compared with hookwire localization is less than the cost of reoperations avoided.

The Dorsal 4-finger Technique: A Novel Method to Examine Metacarpophalangeal Joints in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the dorsal 4-finger technique (DFFT) in examining metacarpophalangeal (MCP) joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and compare it to the traditional 2-finger technique (TFT) using ultrasound (US) as a gold standard. METHODS: Four rheumatologists evaluated 180 MCP joints of 18 patients with RA. All patients underwent US for greyscale (GSUS) and power Doppler US (PDUS). Agreements between rheumatologists, the 2 techniques, and US were evaluated using Cohen κ and the first-order agreement coefficient (AC1) κ methods. RESULTS: The population comprised 17 females (94.4%) with a mean (SD) age and disease duration of 56.8 (14.4) and 21.8 (12.9) years, respectively. Eight patients (44.4%) were taking methotrexate monotherapy, while 10 patients (55.6%) were receiving biologics. US evaluation revealed 69 (38.3%) and 30 (16.7%) joints exhibited synovitis grade 2-3 by GSUS and PDUS, respectively. Effusion was documented in 30 joints (16.7%). The mean intraobserver agreement using the DFFT and TFT were 80.5% and 86%, respectively. The mean interobserver agreements using the DFFT and TFT were 84% and 74%, respectively. κ agreement with US findings was similar for both techniques in tender joints but was higher for the DFFT in nontender joints (0.33 vs 0.07, p = 0.015 for GSUS) and (0.48 vs 0.11, p = 0.002 for PDUS). The DFFT had a higher sensitivity in detecting ballottement by GSUS (0.47 vs 0.2, p < 0.001) and PDUS (0.60 vs 0.27, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The DFFT is a novel, reproducible, and reliable method to examine MCP joints, and it has a better correlation with US than the traditional TFT.

Outcomes and cost-effectiveness of ultrasound-guided injection of the trochanteric bursa.

We hypothesized that ultrasound (US) guidance improves outcomes of corticosteroid injection of trochanteric bursitis. 40 patients with greater trochanteric pain syndrome defined by pain to palpation over the trochanteric bursa were randomized to injection with 5 ml of 1% lidocaine and 80 mg of methylprednisolone using (1) conventional anatomic landmark palpation guidance or (2) US guidance. Procedural pain (Visual Analogue Pain Scale), pain at outcome (2 weeks and 6 months), therapeutic duration, time-to-next intervention, and costs were determined. There were no complications in either group. Ultrasonography demonstrated that at least a 2-in (50.8 mm) needle was required to consistently reach the trochanteric bursa. Pain scores were similar at 2 weeks: US: 1.3 ± 1.9 cm; landmark: 2.2 ± 2.5 cm, 95% CI of difference: - 0.7 < 0.9 < 2.5, p = 0.14. At 6 months, US was superior: US: 3.9 ± 2.0 cm; landmark: 5.5 ± 2.6 cm, 95% CI of difference: 0.8 < 1.6 < 2.4, p = 0.036. However, therapeutic duration (US 4.7 ± 1.4 months; landmark 4.1 ± 2.9 months, 95% CI of difference - 2.2 < - 0.6 < 1.0, p = 0.48), and time-to-next intervention (US 8.7 ± 2.9 months; landmark 8.3 ± 3.8 months, 95% CI of difference - 2.8 < - 0.4 < 2.0, p = 0.62) were similar. Costs/patient/year was 43% greater with US (US $297 ± 99, landmark $207 ± 95; p = 0.017). US-guided and anatomic landmark injection of the trochanteric bursa have similar 2-week and 6-month outcomes; however, US guidance is considerably more expensive and less cost-effective. Anatomic landmark-guided injection remains the method of choice, but should be routinely performed using a sufficiently long needle [at least a 2 in (50.8 mm)]. US guidance should be reserved for extreme obesity or injection failure.

From accuracy to patient outcome and cost-effectiveness evaluations of diagnostic tests and biomarkers: an exemplary modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Proper evaluation of new diagnostic tests is required to reduce overutilization and to limit potential negative health effects and costs related to testing. A decision analytic modelling approach may be worthwhile when a diagnostic randomized controlled trial is not feasible. We demonstrate this by assessing the cost-effectiveness of modified transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) compared with manual palpation for the detection of atherosclerosis in the ascending aorta. METHODS: Based on a previous diagnostic accuracy study, actual Dutch reimbursement data, and evidence from literature we developed a Markov decision analytic model. Cost-effectiveness of modified TEE was assessed for a life time horizon and a health care perspective. Prevalence rates of atherosclerosis were age-dependent and low as well as high rates were applied. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was applied. RESULTS: The model synthesized all available evidence on the risk of stroke in cardiac surgery patients. The modified TEE strategy consistently resulted in more adapted surgical procedures and, hence, a lower risk of stroke and a slightly higher number of life-years. With 10% prevalence of atherosclerosis the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was € 4,651 and € 481 per quality-adjusted life year in 55-year-old men and women, respectively. In all patients aged 65 years or older the modified TEE strategy was cost saving and resulted in additional health benefits. CONCLUSIONS: Decision analytic modelling to assess the cost-effectiveness of a new diagnostic test based on characteristics, costs and effects of the test itself and of the subsequent treatment options is both feasible and valuable. Our case study on modified TEE suggests that it may reduce the risk of stroke in cardiac surgery patients older than 55 years at acceptable cost-effectiveness levels.

Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION: Update of the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for breast cancer in the general population. METHODS: The USPSTF examined the evidence on the efficacy of 5 screening modalities in reducing mortality from breast cancer: film mammography, clinical breast examination, breast self-examination, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging in order to update the 2002 recommendation. To accomplish this update, the USPSTF commissioned 2 studies: 1) a targeted systematic evidence review of 6 selected questions relating to benefits and harms of screening, and 2) a decision analysis that used population modeling techniques to compare the expected health outcomes and resource requirements of starting and ending mammography screening at different ages and using annual versus biennial screening intervals. RECOMMENDATIONS: The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take into account patient context, including the patient's values regarding specific benefits and harms. (Grade C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women between the ages of 50 and 74 years. (Grade B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of clinical breast examination beyond screening mammography in women 40 years or older. (I statement) The USPSTF recommends against clinicians teaching women how to perform breast self-examination. (Grade D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess additional benefits and harms of either digital mammography or magnetic resonance imaging instead of film mammography as screening modalities for breast cancer. (I statement).

Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review is an update of evidence since the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on breast cancer screening. PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of mammography screening in decreasing breast cancer mortality among average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years and 70 years or older, the effectiveness of clinical breast examination and breast self-examination, and the harms of screening. DATA SOURCES: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (through the fourth quarter of 2008), MEDLINE (January 2001 to December 2008), reference lists, and Web of Science searches for published studies and Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium for screening mammography data. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials with breast cancer mortality outcomes for screening effectiveness, and studies of various designs and multiple data sources for harms. DATA EXTRACTION: Relevant data were abstracted, and study quality was rated by using established criteria. DATA SYNTHESIS: Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% for women aged 39 to 49 years (relative risk, 0.85 [95% credible interval, 0.75 to 0.96]; 8 trials). Data are lacking for women aged 70 years or older. Radiation exposure from mammography is low. Patient adverse experiences are common and transient and do not affect screening practices. Estimates of overdiagnosis vary from 1% to 10%. Younger women have more false-positive mammography results and additional imaging but fewer biopsies than older women. Trials of clinical breast examination are ongoing; trials for breast self-examination showed no reductions in mortality but increases in benign biopsy results. LIMITATION: Studies of older women, digital mammography, and magnetic resonance imaging are lacking. CONCLUSION: Mammography screening reduces breast cancer mortality for women aged 39 to 69 years; data are insufficient for older women. False-positive mammography results and additional imaging are common. No benefit has been shown for clinical breast examination or breast self-examination.

Breast cancer screening policies in developing countries: a cost-effectiveness analysis for India.

BACKGROUND: India, the largest developing country, has a steadily rising incidence of breast cancer. Estimates and comparisons of the cost-effectiveness of feasible breast cancer screening policies in developing countries and identification of the determinants of cost and efficacy are needed. METHODS: A Microsimulation Screening Analysis model of breast cancer was calibrated to available data on breast cancer incidence, stage distribution, and mortality in India. The model was used to estimate the costs of screening for breast cancer in India, its effects on mortality, and its cost-effectiveness (ie, costs of screening per life-year gained or life saved). Screening using clinical breast examination (CBE) or mammography among different age groups and at various frequencies was analyzed. Costs were expressed in international dollars (Int.$), the currency used by the World Health Organization, which has the same purchasing power in India as the US dollar has in the United States. To determine which factors influenced cost-effectiveness, sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The estimated mortality reduction was the greatest for programs targeting women between age 40 and 60 years. Using a 3% discount rate, a single CBE at age 50 had an estimated cost-effectiveness ratio of Int.$793 per life year gained and a breast cancer mortality reduction of 2%. The cost-effectiveness ratio increased to Int.$1135 per life year gained for every-5-year CBE (age 40-60 years) and to Int.$1341 for biennial CBE (age 40-60 years); the corresponding reductions in breast cancer mortality were 8.2% and 16.3%, respectively. CBE performed annually from ages 40 to 60 was predicted to be nearly as efficacious as biennial mammography screening for reducing breast cancer mortality while incurring only half the net costs. The main factors affecting cost-effectiveness were breast cancer incidence, stage distribution, and cost savings on prevented palliative care. CONCLUSION: The estimated cost-effectiveness of CBE screening for breast cancer in India compares favorably with that of mammography in developed countries. However, in view of competing priorities and economic conditions, the introduction of screening in India represents a greater challenge than it has been in more developed countries.

A model-based comparison of breast cancer screening strategies: mammograms and clinical breast examinations.

In screening for secondary prevention of breast cancer, clinical breast examination (CBE) combined with mammography may improve overall screening sensitivity compared with mammography alone. A systematic evaluation of the relative expenses and projected benefit of combining these two screening modalities is not presently available. We addressed this issue using a microsimulation model incorporating age-specific preclinical duration of the disease, age-specific sensitivities of the two modalities, age-specific incidence of the disease, screening strategy, and competing causes of mortality. We examined a total of 48 screening strategies, depending on the age range, the examination interval, and whether mammography or CBE is given at every one or two exam. Our results indicate that a biennial mammography can be cost-effective if coupled with annual CBE. For each screening interval and starting age, giving mammography every two exams and CBE at every exam has the lowest marginal cost per year of quality-adjusted life saved, whereas giving both at every exam has the highest. Comparing annual mammography and CBE to biennial mammography and annual CBE from 50 to 79, the total cost was reduced by 35%, whereas the marginal quality-adjusted life years only decreased by 12%. Similar reductions are observed for other starting ages. It is cost-effective to have a biennial mammography if coupled with an annual CBE. Annual mammography combined with CBE every 6 months will lead to a 41% increase in the quality-adjusted life years compared with annual mammography and CBE from 50 to 79, whereas the total cost increases by 30%.

Costs and effects of ultrasonography in the evaluation of palpable breast masses.

OBJECTIVE: To study the costs and effects of incorporating ultrasonography in the triple assessment of palpable breast masses. METHODS: A decision analytic model was designed to compare a conventional strategy of performing fine-needle aspiration cytology after clinical examination and mammography, with three different experimental strategies of preceding ultrasonography. Empirical data were used from a prospective study in 522 breasts in 492 patients with a palpable mass, including 93 malignancies. In strategy 1, cases with probably benign, suspect malignant, and malignant ultrasonography results were referred for fine-needle aspiration cytology; in strategy 2, benign cases were also referred for fine-needle aspiration cytology; and in strategy 3, ultrasonography was only performed in patients with benign results on clinical examination and mammography, whereas immediate fine-needle aspiration cytology was performed in patients with suspicious lesions. Outcome variables included the total costs and the expected number of life years. Sensitivity analysis was performed on all parameters in the model. RESULTS: All strategies reported a similar life expectancy of 31.0 years. Cost-minimization demonstrated that experimental strategy 3 was the least expensive strategy (3013 Euro). Experimental strategy 2 was the most costly one (3512 Euro). Compared with the conventional strategy of immediate fine-needle aspiration cytology (3087 Euro), both ultrasonography strategies 1 and -3 were preferred. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating ultrasonography in the triple assessment of palpable breast masses can result in a reduction of the total costs for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer.

[Diagnosis of appendicular syndromes: for a rational approach]. / Diagnostic des syndromes appendiculaires: pour une prise en charge rationnelle.

Diagnosis of acute appendicitis is made in 80% of cases by analysis of symptoms and physical examination. Epigastric pain, secondary located in the lower quadrant, along with tenderness is the most specific sign of acute appendicitis. In 20% of cases, diagnosis is difficult. High level of leucocytosis is not of great value. Laparoscopy has been proposed to visualize the appendix. Echotomography and tomodensitometry are less invasive and less costly procedures, that let surgeons identify the appendix and confirm or reject the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Thus, surgical acts should be restricted to necessary appendicectomies.

Evaluation of prostatic specific antigen and digital rectal examination as screening tests for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: The 11,811 first visits and 46,751 annual follow-up visits performed since 1988 were analyzed in order to assess the efficacy of serum prostatic specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) for diagnosis of prostate cancer. METHODS: At first visit, screening included DRE and measurement of PSA using 3.0 ng/ml as upper limit of normal, demonstrated as optimal value in the course of the study. Transrectal echography of the prostate (TRUS) was performed only if PSA and/or DRE was abnormal. For elevated PSA, biopsy was performed only if PSA was above the value predicted from prostatic volume measured by TRUS. At follow-up visits, it was decided during the course of the study to use PSA alone. RESULTS: PSA was above 3.0 ng/ml in 16.6% and 15.6% of men at first and follow-up visits, respectively. Prostate cancer was found in 2.9% of men invited for screening at first visit and in only 0.4% of men at follow-up visits for a 7.1-fold decrease at follow-up visits done up to 11 years. PSA alone allowed to find 90.5% and 90. 0% of cancers at first and follow-up visits, respectively, compared to 41.1% and 25.0% by DRE alone. In the presence of normal PSA, 344 and 1,919 DREs are needed to find one prostate cancer at first and follow-up visits, respectively. A significant improvement in stage of the disease is found at follow-up (215 cancers) compared to first visits (337 cancers). Comparison made between men invited for screening and those who were not invited but screened showed no significant difference in terms of incidence and prevalence of prostate cancer as well as diagnosis of cancer as a function of age or as a function of PSA, DRE, and TRUS data. The cost for finding one case of prostate cancer is estimated at Can $2,420 and Can $7, 105 (first and follow-up visits, respectively, when PSA is used as prescreening). CONCLUSIONS: PSA used as prescreening and followed by DRE and TRUS when PSA is abnormal is highly efficient in detecting prostate cancer at a localized (potentially curable) stage since 99% of the cancers diagnosed were at such a localized stage, thus practically eliminating the diagnosis of metastatic and noncurable prostate cancer. The approach used is highly reliable, sensitive, efficient, and acceptable by the general population. The detection of clinically nonsignificant cancer is an exception.

Use of the "triple test" for palpable breast lesions yields high diagnostic accuracy and cost savings.

BACKGROUND: The "triple test" for palpable breast lesions consists of physical examination, mammography, and fine-needle aspiration. METHODS: Forty-six lesions in 43 patients were subjected to all three components of the triple test, followed by confirmatory open biopsy. RESULTS: In all 21 cases where the triple test was concordant (elements had either all malignant or all benign results), pathologic analysis of open biopsy samples was confirmatory (predictive value and sensitivity 100%). Fine-needle aspiration was the most reliable element of the triple test in cases where the elements of the test were nonconcordant (negative predictive value and sensitivity of 95% and 96%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The triple test was 100% accurate in the diagnosis of palpable breast lesions when all three elements were concordant. Cost analysis revealed that elimination of confirmatory open biopsy in such cases and also in cases in which the fine-needle aspiration and one other element of the test had a suspicious or malignant result, could yield an average per-case cost savings of up to $1,412 compared to triple test followed by routine confirmatory open biopsy.

Screening for prostate cancer. A decision analytic view.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical and economic effects of screening for prostate cancer with prostate-specific antigen (PSA), transrectal ultrasound (TRUS), and digital rectal examination (DRE). DESIGN: Decision analytic cost-utility analysis comparing four screening strategies with a strategy of not screening. We assumed that the cancer detection rate and stage distribution were predicted by each combination of tests and that localized cancer was treated with radical prostatectomy. For each strategy, we calculated life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE), and cost-utility ratios for unselected and high-prevalence populations. DATA: Probabilities and rates for clinical events were gathered from published data. We assessed utilities by the time-trade-off method using urologists, radiation oncologists, and internists as subjects. The Clinical Cost Manager at the New England Medical Center provided cost data. RESULTS: In unselected men between the ages of 50 and 70 years, screening with PSA or TRUS prolonged unadjusted life expectancy but diminished QALE. Screening with DRE alone yielded no reduction in mortality at any age. All programs increased costs. Results were sensitive only to assumptions about the efficacy of treatment. In high-prevalence populations, screening produced a similar pattern: gains in unadjusted life expectancy, losses in QALE, and increased costs. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis does not support using PSA, TRUS, or DRE to screen asymptomatic men for prostatic cancer. Screening may result in poorer health outcomes and will increase costs dramatically. Assessment of comorbidity, risk attitude, and valuation of sexual function may identify individuals who will benefit from screening, but selecting high-prevalence populations will not improve the benefit of screening.

Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men ages 60 to 80 years. A cost-effectiveness analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening by physical examination or abdominal ultrasonography for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in men aged 60 to 80 years. DATA SOURCES: A systematic review of the pertinent literature by the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination, augmented by an additional computerized search (MEDLINE) and references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles. Several experts reviewed the data for completeness. STUDY SELECTION: Published English-language studies that present data relevant to screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm. DATA EXTRACTION: Several reviewers determined a range of data and the most probable value for each parameter. DATA SYNTHESIS: A computer spreadsheet model was constructed to simulate the costs and effectiveness of various screening protocols in a cohort of 10,000 men during a period of 20 years. The primary cost-effectiveness measure computed was incremental present-value dollar expenditures for screening and treatment per incremental present-value life-year saved by the screening program. Using the "most probable" values for the simulation parameters, a single screening procedure of abdominal palpation followed by abdominal ultrasound scan for patients with positive screening results is estimated to gain 20 life-years at a cost of $28,741 per life-year. A single ultrasound screen gains 57 life-years at a cost of $41,550 per life-year. A repeated ultrasound screen after 5 years gains 1 additional life-year at a cost of $906,769. CONCLUSIONS: A single screen for AAA by abdominal palpation in men from age 60 to 80 years might be considered cost-effective but of small benefit. A single screen with ultrasonography is at the high end of the cost-per-life-year range that might be considered cost-effective and also is of modest benefit. Repeated screening is not cost-effective.

The benefit and cost of prostate cancer early detection. The Investigators of the American Cancer Society-National Prostate Cancer Detection Project.

Cost-effectiveness calculations of prostate cancer early detection have not been possible due to the lack of any data demonstrating reduction in mortality from any test or procedure. Prior analyses focused only on cost assessments without consideration of any possible benefits. We used current data from three consecutive years of the American Cancer Society-National Prostate Cancer Detection Project to assess different economic perspectives of test performance, marginal costs, and benefit-cost analysis. The marginal cost, or cost per cancer, of digital rectal examination (DRE) markedly increased by the third year relative to several proposed prostate-specific antigen (PSA) scenarios. Sensitivity analysis for average cost showed that at 4 ng/ml, pricing PSA below $30 would be the most potent factor in potentially lowering costs. Analysis of receiver operator characteristic curves suggested that optimal performance for PSA may be at 3 ng/ml when combined with DRE or between 2 to 3 ng/ml when used alone. Benefit-cost calculations demonstrated that DRE when performed by highly skilled examiners had the lowest cost. However, DRE became one of the most costly detection scenarios when a minor decrease in performance was assumed. Sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the three most determinant parameters of net benefit, in decreasing order, are: specificity, benefits from earlier therapy, and prevalence. If a slightly more specific PSA assay is developed, the higher prevalence of clinically detectable prostate cancer could also make screening less costly than breast cancer screening. Under the assumptions of these analyses, the combination of PSA and DRE appears to represent an ethical and economical detection choice for individual patients in consultation with their physicians. Additional research is needed to quantify the significance of differences between different screening strategies.

Screening for carcinoma of the prostate in a randomly selected population using duplicate digital rectal examination.

Of 9,026 males, aged 50-69 years, 1,494 were randomly selected and invited to participate in a screening programme for carcinoma of the prostate. Of these 1,163 (78%) accepted. Rectal examination was performed independently by a general practitioner (GP) and by a urologist at the GP's surgery. Carcinoma of the prostate was suspected by one or both physicians in 45 cases, and subsequently confirmed by cytological investigation in 13 cases. Ten patients underwent radical prostatectomy, one received radiation treatment, one case was too advanced for curative treatment, and one was scheduled for subsequent reassessment. Screening, as a means of early diagnosis of carcinoma of the prostate by either a urologist or a GP, using digital rectal examination, thus appears to be a cost-effective procedure, though the question still remains whether this will lead to prolongation of survival or not.

Early detection of breast cancer in women.

Breast self-exam, clinical breast exam and mammography are the primary screening modalities for the early detection of breast cancer. In this article, we review the epidemiology of breast cancer and methodologic considerations in screening for breast cancer. For each screening modality, we assess the evidence for its effectiveness in reducing breast cancer mortality. For each modality we also discuss the limitations, cost/benefit considerations, utilization, and published recommendations for use. This article is intended to facilitate primary care providers in decision-making regarding the early detection of breast cancer.