Why some women tend to overestimate their breast cancer risks
Understanding personal risk is important when it comes to adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines, but how accurate are women’s perceptions pertaining to their own unique risks?
Recent survey data indicate that there are a number of factors that impact a woman’s perceived personal risk (PPR) for breast cancer, including age, family history and personal clinical history. But when factoring breast density categories into the equation, it can be particularly challenging to differentiate between actual and perceived breast cancer risks [1].
According to the survey, which was completed by 508 women with dense breasts, high PPR occurs most frequently in younger women, women with a family history of breast cancer and women with a “high risk” designation.
Women who have been called back for additional imaging following a breast cancer screening and women with a family history of breast cancer have a less accurate depiction of their PPR. Although these patients believe their risks to be high, and rightfully so, experts involved in the new research suggested that they also tend to overestimate them
The good news is that prior research has shown that women who get called back for additional imaging after a cancer screening do not have a negative attitude toward screening, indicating that follow-up imaging would not deter them from guideline adherence in the future, the authors suggested.
Corresponding author of the new Clinical Imaging paper Matthew W. Miller, from the Department of Radiology and Medical Imaging with University of Virginia Health System, and colleagues noted that the survey data imply there is a need for better methods of educating women with dense breasts on their actual cancer risks, stating that this improvement “would facilitate more appropriate, individualized screening strategies and could help reduce anxiety and unnecessary treatment for patients who overestimate their risk.”
They suggested that more thorough patient-provider discussions could achieve this by addressing factors such as the full extent of how family history and callbacks affect risk, in addition to the clinical significance of breast cancer risk scores.
The view the study abstract, click here.
In addition to her background in journalism, Hannah also has patient-facing experience in clinical settings, having spent more than 12 years working as a registered rad tech. She began covering the medical imaging industry for Innovate Healthcare in 2021.