American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2017-2018. Cancer.org. Available at https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures/breast-cancer-facts-and-figures-2017-2018.pdf. 2017; Accessed: August 12, 2019.
Schonberg MA, Ramanan RA, McCarthy EP, Marcantonio ER. Decision making and counseling around mammography screening for women aged 80 or older. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Sep. 21(9):979-85. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Badgwell BD, Giordano SH, Duan ZZ, Fang S, Bedrosian I, Kuerer HM, et al. Mammography Before Diagnosis Among Women Age 80 Years and Older With Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008 Apr 21. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Moss SM, Wale C, Smith R, et al. Effect of mammographic screening from age 40 years on breast cancer mortality in the UK Age trial at 17 years' follow-up: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015 Sep. 16 (9):1123-1132. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
García-Albéniz X, Hernán MA, Logan RW, Price M, Armstrong K, Hsu J. Continuation of Annual Screening Mammography and Breast Cancer Mortality in Women Older Than 70 Years. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 17. 172 (6):381-389. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Brawley OW. On Mammography Screening for Women Older Than 70 Years. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Mar 17. 172 (6):427-428. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, Yaffe M, Baum JK, Acharyya S, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2005 Oct 27. 353(17):1773-83. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Schousboe JT, Kerlikowske K, Loh A, Cummings SR. Personalizing mammography by breast density and other risk factors for breast cancer: analysis of health benefits and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jul 5. 155(1):10-20. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Lee CI, Chen LE, Elmore JG. Risk-based Breast Cancer Screening: Implications of Breast Density. Med Clin North Am. 2017 Jul. 101 (4):725-741. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
American College of Radiology. ACR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Web site. Available at www.acr.org. [Full Text].
Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2015 May 19. 162 (10):673-81. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
American College of Radiology. CR Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Web site. Available at https://www.acr.org/Clinical-Resources/Reporting-and-Data-Systems/Bi-Rads. Accessed: : November 5, 2018.
Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, O'Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology. 2001 Apr. 219(1):192-202. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Hubbard RA, Kerlikowske K, Flowers CI, Yankaskas BC, Zhu W, Miglioretti DL. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18. 155(8):481-92. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
Cady B. How to prevent invasive breast cancer: detect and excise duct carcinoma in situ. J Surg Oncol. 1998 Oct. 69(2):60-2. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Rafferty EA, Park JM, Philpotts LE, Poplack SP, Sumkin JH, Halpern EF, et al. Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. Radiology. 2013 Jan. 266(1):104-13. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Wallis MG, Moa E, Zanca F, Leifland K, Danielsson M. Two-View and Single-View Tomosynthesis versus Full-Field Digital Mammography: High-Resolution X-Ray Imaging Observer Study. Radiology. 2012 Mar. 262(3):788-96. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, Eben EB, Ekseth U, Haakenaasen U, et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology. 2013 Apr. 267(1):47-56. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology. 2013 Dec. 269(3):694-700. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Feng SS, Sechopoulos I. Clinical digital breast tomosynthesis system: dosimetric characterization. Radiology. 2012 Apr. 263(1):35-42. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
American College of Radiology. ACR Statement on Breast Tomosynthesis. American College of Radiology. Available at http://www.acr.org/About-Us/Media-Center/Position-Statements/Position-Statements-Folder/20141124-ACR-Statement-on-Breast-Tomosynthesis. Accessed: April 22, 2015.
High Value Care Task Force of the American College of Physicians. Screening for cancer: advice for high-value care from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2015 May 19. 162 (10):718-25. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
American College of Radiology. ACR Statement on Breast Tomosynthesis. American College of Radiology. Available at https://www.acr.org/Advocacy-and-Economics/ACR-Position-Statements/Breast-Tomosynthesis. November 24, 2014; Accessed: : January 17, 2019.
Bernardi D, Macaskill P, Pellegrini M, et al. Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study. Lancet Oncol. 2016 Aug. 17 (8):1105-1113. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Jong RA, Yaffe MJ, Skarpathiotakis M, Shumak RS, Danjoux NM, Gunesekara A, et al. Contrast-enhanced digital mammography: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2003 Sep. 228(3):842-50. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Lewin JM, Niklason L. Advanced applications of digital mammography: tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography. Semin Roentgenol. 2007 Oct. 42(4):243-52. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Jochelson MS, Dershaw DD, Sung JS, Heerdt AS, Thornton C, Moskowitz CS, et al. Bilateral contrast-enhanced dual-energy digital mammography: feasibility and comparison with conventional digital mammography and MR imaging in women with known breast carcinoma. Radiology. 2013 Mar. 266(3):743-51. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Zonderland HM, Coerkamp EG, Hermans J, et al. Diagnosis of breast cancer: contribution of US as an adjunct to mammography. Radiology. 1999 Nov. 213(2):413-22. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Durand MA, Hooley RJ. Implementation of Whole-Breast Screening Ultrasonography. Radiol Clin North Am. 2017 May. 55 (3):527-539. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Guo R, Lu G, Qin B, Fei B. Ultrasound Imaging Technologies for Breast Cancer Detection and Management: A Review. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2018 Jan. 44 (1):37-70. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology. 2002 Oct. 225(1):165-75. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Kopans DB. Negative mammographic and US findings do not help exclude breast cancer. Radiology. 2002 Mar. 222(3):857-8; author reply 858-9. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Zonderland HM. The role of ultrasound in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Semin Ultrasound CT MR. 2000 Aug. 21(4):317-24. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, Mendelson EB, Lehrer D, Böhm-Vélez M, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008 May 14. 299(18):2151-63. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM, Koo HR, Kim WH, Cho N, et al. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography. Radiology. 2014 Feb. 270(2):369-77. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). FDA approves first breast ultrasound imaging system for dense breast tissue. Available at http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm319867.htm. Accessed: September 18, 2012.
Hill DA, Haas JS, Wellman R, et al. Utilization of breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging in community practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2018 Mar. 33 (3):275-283. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Nakahara H, Namba K, Wakamatsu H, Watanabe R, Furusawa H, Shirouzu M, et al. Extension of breast cancer: comparison of CT and MRI. Radiat Med. 2002 Jan-Feb. 20(1):17-23. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Berg WA, Gutierrez L, NessAiver MS, Carter WB, Bhargavan M, Lewis RS, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mammography, clinical examination, US, and MR imaging in preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Radiology. 2004 Dec. 233(3):830-49. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Bieling HB, Wardelmann E, Leutner CC, Koenig R, et al. MRI for diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ: a prospective observational study. Lancet. 2007 Aug 11. 370(9586):485-92. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Lehman CD, Smith RA. The role of MRI in breast cancer screening. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2009 Nov. 7(10):1109-15. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis. Version 3.2018. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Available at https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast-screening.pdf. October 4, 2018;
Yau EJ, Gutierrez RL, DeMartini WB, Eby PR, Peacock S, Lehman CD. The utility of breast MRI as a problem-solving tool. Breast J. 2011 May-Jun. 17(3):273-80. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Uematsu T, Sano M, Homma K. In vitro high-resolution helical CT of small axillary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer: correlation of CT and histology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001 Apr. 176(4):1069-74. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Taillefer R. The role of 99mTc-sestamibi and other conventional radiopharmaceuticals in breast cancer diagnosis. Semin Nucl Med. 1999 Jan. 29(1):16-40. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Narayanan D, Berg WA. Dedicated Breast Gamma Camera Imaging and Breast PET: Current Status and Future Directions. PET Clin. 2018 Jul. 13 (3):363-381. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Urbano N, Scimeca M, Di Russo C, Bonanno E, Schillaci O. Breast-Specific Gamma Imaging with [⁹⁹mTc]Tc-Sestamibi: An In Vivo Analysis for Early Identification of Breast Cancer Lesions Expressing Bone Biomarkers. J Clin Med. 2020 Mar 10. 9 (3):[QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Müller FH, Farahati J, Müller AG, Gillman E, Hentschel M. Positron emission mammography in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Is maximum PEM uptake value a valuable threshold for malignant breast cancer detection?. Nuklearmedizin. 2016. 55 (1):15-20. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Narayanan D, Berg WA. Use of Breast-Specific PET Scanners and Comparison with MR Imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2018 May. 26 (2):265-272. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Rechtman LR, Lenihan MJ, Lieberman JH, Teal CB, Torrente J, Rapelyea JA, et al. Breast-specific gamma imaging for the detection of breast cancer in dense versus nondense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014 Feb. 202(2):293-8. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Berg WA, Madsen KS, Schilling K, Tartar M, Pisano ED, Larsen LH, et al. Breast cancer: comparative effectiveness of positron emission mammography and MR imaging in presurgical planning for the ipsilateral breast. Radiology. 2011 Jan. 258(1):59-72. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
Hendrick RE. Radiation doses and cancer risks from breast imaging studies. Radiology. 2010 Oct. 257(1):246-53. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
[Guideline] Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology. Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women. Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology. Number 179. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Available at https://www.acog.org/clinical/clinical-guidance/practice-bulletin/articles/2017/07/breast-cancer-risk-assessment-and-screening-in-average-risk-women. July 2017;
American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015 Oct 20. 314 (15):1599-614. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Siu AL, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Breast Cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2016 Feb 16. 164 (4):279-96. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
[Guideline] Screening for Breast Cancer. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Available at http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/Page/Document/RecommendationStatementFinal/breast-cancer-screening1. 2016; Accessed: : November 5, 2018.
European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC) Contributor Group. Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis: A Synopsis of the European Breast Guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2020 Jan 7. 172 (1):46-56. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Average Risk: 2015 Guideline Update From the American Cancer Society. JAMA. 2015 Oct 20. 314 (15):1599-614. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Smith RA, Andrews K, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2016: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016 Mar-Apr. 66 (2):96-114. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
American Cancer Society Breast Cancer Advisory Group. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007 Mar-Apr. 57 (2):75-89. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts & Figures 2013-2014. American Cancer Society. Available at http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/content/@research/documents/document/acspc-042725.pdf. Accessed: May 6, 2015.
Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Nov 17. 151(10):716-26, W-236. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
USPSTF Mammography Recommendations Should Be Specifically Excluded From Health Care Reform Legislation: Changes Must Be Made to USPSTF Representation and Recommendation Process: Joint Statement from the American College of Radiology and Society of Breast Imaging:. American College of Radiology. Available at http://www.acr.org/HomePageCategories/News/ACRNewsCenter/ExcludedUSPSTFRecsFromHCR.aspx. Accessed: December 10, 2009.
Canto MT, Anderson WF, Brawley O. Geographic variation in breast cancer mortality for white and black women: 1986-1995. CA Cancer J Clin. 2001 Nov-Dec. 51(6):367-70. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Cancer Data. Available at www.cdc.gov/cancer/natlcancerdata.htm. [Full Text].
Cherel P, Becette V, Hagay C. Stellate images: anatomic and radiologic correlations. Eur J Radiol. 2005 Apr. 54(1):37-54. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Dang CM, Zaghiyan K, Karlan SR, Phillips EH. Increased use of MRI for breast cancer surveillance and staging is not associated with increased rate of mastectomy. Am Surg. 2009 Oct. 75(10):937-40. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
De Koning HJ. Breast cancer screening; cost-effective in practice?. Eur J Radiol. 2000 Jan. 33(1):32-7. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening for breast cancer. JAMA. 2005 Mar 9. 293(10):1245-56. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Evans DG, Lalloo F. Risk assessment and management of high risk familial breast cancer. J Med Genet. 2002 Dec. 39(12):865-71. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Oct 7. CD001877. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Hackshaw AK, Wald NJ, Michell MJ, et al. An investigation into why two-view mammography is better than one-view in breast cancer screening. Clin Radiol. 2000 Jun. 55(6):454-8. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Jemal A, Thomas A, Murray T, Thun M. Cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin. 2002 Jan-Feb. 52(1):23-47. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Jemal A, Tiwari RC, Murray T, et al. Cancer statistics, 2004. CA Cancer J Clin. 2004 Jan-Feb. 54(1):8-29. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Kerlikowske K, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham LA, et al. Breast cancer yield for screening mammographic examinations with recommendation for short-interval follow-up. Radiology. 2005 Mar. 234(3):684-92. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, et al. Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. Radiographics. 2003 Jul-Aug. 23(4):881-95. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Marchick J, Henson DE. Correlations between access to mammography and breast cancer stage at diagnosis. Cancer. 2005 Mar 16. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Miller AB. Screening for Breast Cancer -is There an Alternative to Mammography?. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2005 Jan-Mar. 6(1):83-6. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
National Cancer Institute. Survillence, Epidemiology & End Results (SEER). Incidence: Breast Cancer. Available at www.seer.cancer.gov/faststats/html/inc_breast.html. [Full Text].
Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology. 2001 Jul. 220(1):13-30. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Smith RA, Saslow D, Sawyer KA, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast cancer screening: update 2003. CA Cancer J Clin. 2003 May-Jun. 53(3):141-69. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Thurfjell MG, Lindgren A, Thurfjell E. Nonpalpable breast cancer: mammographic appearance as predictor of histologic type. Radiology. 2002 Jan. 222(1):165-70. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Timins JK. Controversies in mammography. N J Med. 2005 Jan-Feb. 102(1-2):45-9. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Uchiyama N, Miyakawa K, Moriyama N, Kumazaki T. Radiographic features of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Radiat Med. 19(1):19-25. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Uematsu T, Kasami M, Yuen S, Igarashi T, Nasu H. Comparison of 3- and 1.5-T dynamic breast MRI for visualization of spiculated masses previously identified using mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012 Jun. 198(6):W611-7. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Wasif N, Garreau J, Terando A, Kirsch D, Mund DF, Giuliano AE. MRI versus ultrasonography and mammography for preoperative assessment of breast cancer. Am Surg. 2009 Oct. 75(10):970-5. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Wingo PA, Ries LA, Parker SL, Heath CW Jr. Long-term cancer patient survival in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1998 Apr. 7(4):271-82. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Young KC. Radiation doses in the UK trial of breast screening in women aged 40-48 years. Br J Radiol. 2002 Apr. 75(892):362-70. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Helal MH, Mansour SM, Zaglol M, Salaleldin LA, Nada OM, Haggag MA. Staging of breast cancer and the advanced applications of digital mammogram: what the physician needs to know?. Br J Radiol. 2017 Mar. 90 (1071):20160717. [QxMD MEDLINE Link]. [Full Text].
Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology. Practice Bulletin Number 179: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women. Obstet Gynecol. 2017 Jul. 130 (1):e1-e16. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].
Qaseem A, Lin JS, MustaClinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians. Screening for Breast Cancer in Average-Risk Women: A Guidance Statement From the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Apr 16. 170 (8):547-560. [QxMD MEDLINE Link].

Media Gallery

Trends in female breast cancer death rates by race and ethnicity, US, 1975-2010. Since the widespread adoption of screening mammography in the later 80s, the death rate from breast cancer has decreased 34%. Courtesy of the American Cancer Society (American Cancer Society. Breast Cancer Facts and Figures 2013-2014. Atlanta: American Cancer Society, Inc.).
Normal four-view mammogram showing breasts that are extremely dense (BI-RADS category D).
Normal four-view mammogram showing breasts that are almost entirely fatty (BI-RADS category A) with very little parenchyma.
Screening mammogram depicts malignant pleomorphic microcalcifications in a linear branching distribution.
A four-view mammogram shows a highly suspicious mass with spiculated margins and increased density in the right lower outer quadrant: an invasive ductal carcinoma.
Image from a mammogram shows a benign mass: a fibroadenoma with well-defined edges and a halo sign.
Benign microcalcifications: secretory change.
Bilateral mammogram shows diffuse inflammatory carcinoma of the left breast, which appears smaller and more dense than the right breast.
Traumatic fat necrosis. Mammogram shows traumatic fat necrosis following removal of a lesion. The stellate lesion has a halo center.
Standard 2D mammogram (left) is normal. The corresponding slice from the tomosynthesis (right) taken at the same time shows a mass with architectural distortion.
Mammographic spot image during a ductogram shows contrast (white) within the catheter and branching ductal system.
An ultrasound of a benign breast mass with circumscribed margins and oval shape; in this case, the mass is a fibroadenoma.
Ultrasound shows a suspicious hypoechoic mass with angular margins; in this case, the mass is an invasive ductal carcinoma.
Ultrasound shows an anechoic cyst with smooth margins and enhanced through transmission. This is benign and does not need any imaging follow-up.
T1-weighted image with fat suppression before contrast. There is a large cyst in the right breast. The cancer in the left breast is isointense to normal tissue and very difficult to see.
Same patient as in previous image: T1-weighted image with fat suppression after contrast clearly shows the posterior cancer invading the pectoralis major on the left.
Anatomy of the breast.

of 17

Category	Description	Risk of Malignancy	Care Plan and Comments
1	Negative	5 in 10,000	Continue annual screening mammography for women 40 years of age or older.
2	Benign finding, noncancerous	5 in 10,000	Continue annual screening mammography for women 40 years of age or older. This category is for cases with a characteristically benign finding (eg, cyst, fibroadenoma).
3	Probably benign finding	< 2%	Usually, 6-month follow-up mammography is performed. Most category 3 abnormalities are not evaluated with biopsy.
4	Suspicious abnormality	25-50%	Most category 4 abnormalities are benign but may require biopsy.
5	Highly suggestive of malignancy	75-99%, depending on how individual radiologists define categories 4 and 5	Classic signs of cancer are seen on the mammogram. All category 5 abnormalities are typically evaluated with biopsy; if the results are benign, repeat biopsy is done to ensure correct sampling.

Mammography in Breast Cancer Questions & Answers

References

Tables

Contributor Information and Disclosures

What would you like to print?