Dr. Dale also suggested that resource allocation and federal funding concerns may have at least partially motivated the government study. “The government is paying the brunt of this, and annual screening runs into the billions,” he said. “But if you really look at the economics of it, and the years of life it can save – the fact that these women are not undergoing the much more expensive therapies [of treating more advanced cancer], and the economic benefit their productive lives give our economy – the economic picture doesn't look that bad.”
Another 2011 study supports this conclusion, he said. Dr. Blake Cady of the Cambridge (Mass.) Breast Center and associates suggested that financial resources were a driving point of the recommendations. The annual cost of an additional 25,000 mammograms could well be offset by an estimated $50,000-$100,000 per life saved, they said. “Why the USPSTF deliberately chose a less effective method of preventing mortality in the most frequent and feared cancer of women is a puzzle, especially as cost considerations may not be a major adverse factor, although resource allocation is increased,” they concluded (Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2011;18:903-6).
The American Cancer Society, American College of Surgeons, and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists still recommend either annual or biennial screening for women, beginning at age 40.
'Our study found that tumors identified through mammography generally had better outcomes.'
Source DR. DALE