Women that fall under the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 genes tests though, would not be subject to the guidelines established. The BRCA tests are also being scrutinized by health insurance companies as well since they appear to be a big expense at around $3000.
So now where do we go from here, should we have more of the BRCA-1 and BRCA-2 tests done to actually find the women who need to have the screening started earlier? It would make sense to me and again I wonder if cost is somehow in the picture a bit. There is also a big move to bring down the costs of the tests and share some of the genomic data with other researchers too instead of one company having a hold on the full patent. Patents are changing quite a bit today too, ask any pharma company. BD
For the first time in 20 years, a government panel is telling women in their 40s to stop getting routine mammograms and recommending that a host of other breast cancer screening slow down.
The United States Preventive Service Task Force announced Monday that it recommends against annual mammograms for women age 40 to 49 because, they say, the "harms" and risks of testing do not outweigh the benefits.
USPSTF still recommends doctors start screening all women over age 50, but with a mammogram once every two years instead of annually.
The task force also recommends against teaching breast self-exams for all women and said evidence was insufficient to recommend mammograms for women older than 74.
Anecdotally, most people in the United States can think of a woman they know who caught breast cancer through a routine mammogram long before she turned 50. Many patient advocates wonder if money fueled the decision.