How often do you get mammograms these days?

[SKL]

I'm 58 and I had sorta put myself on a 2 year plan, but I'm thinking maybe that's overkill.

I don't have the gene that corresponds with high risk of deadly breast cancer.  My granny did have breast cancer, but she also had many other health concerns, i.e. other cancers, was a smoker, obese, etc. (died of liver cancer).

What is the standard these days for mammogram frequency, for people who aren't particularly high risk?

[Scarlett]

My mom and paternal sister both had bc so I am still on the yearly plan.  

[Bambam]

I'm 60. I'm still on the yearly plan, because they regularly find something of interest (always has been a cyst, but we will see when I go back this time in early October) and make me come back for a closer look. Doctor still wants yearly for mammograms, so I'm okay with that.  No breast cancer history in family. I don't know if I have the gene. 

I believe these are the official recommendations:
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/types/breast-cancer/screening-tests-and-early-detection/american-cancer-society-recommendations-for-the-early-detection-of-breast-cancer.html

Edited Saturday at 05:42 PM by Bambam

[gardenmom5]

I don't have the BRCA gene.  No females members of my family have had breast cancer to my knowledge.
I will go at least five years.   
I had one this year - and am so ticked because they claimed they were "following" me - which is an extra charge. (and more profitable for them.)
I will not be going back to the same radiologist.
I have dense breasts ("requiring" an US) and have had cysts that come and go on their own.

[Kassia]

I go every year for a screening, but almost always get called back and end up going again six months later due to extremely dense breast tissue.  It's frustrating and expensive especially since I think I'm low risk for breast cancer.  

[Anne]

I tried to schedule mine recently (about 18 mos after my last one), and the scheduler refused to schedule me b/c I hadn’t seen my doctor in the last year!!!!!   Apparently I must have a “current relationship” with a doctor whom they can send the results to.   Very annoying and frustrating.  I’m not going to the doctor just to check their boxes!!   I’ll try calling back again and talking to someone else in hopes of talking to a more sensible person.

 

[Ann.without.an.e]

I had one four years or so ago and haven’t had one since. 
DD was a bio major at Duke and there were a lot of studies going on at the time that made her truly think they could be counter productive unless you have a family history. 

[SKL]

41 minutes ago, Anne said:

I tried to schedule mine recently (about 18 mos after my last one), and the scheduler refused to schedule me b/c I hadn’t seen my doctor in the last year!!!!!   Apparently I must have a “current relationship” with a doctor whom they can send the results to.   Very annoying and frustrating.  I’m not going to the doctor just to check their boxes!!   I’ll try calling back again and talking to someone else in hopes of talking to a more sensible person.

I just schedule my tests online (mammogram and colonoscopy).  So far so good.

[SKL]

I thought they had changed the recommendation to less than yearly, but I just got an email saying the recommendation is still yearly.

I am wondering if I should switch to 2.5 years or even 5 years.  I am otherwise pretty healthy & not well-endowed.  I have a pretty high deductible and don't want to go for the boob crush just for the fun of it.  😛

Edited Saturday at 06:52 PM by SKL

[scholastica]

Annually. Only 10% of breast cancers are caused by the gene mutations. Don’t have a false sense of security because you don’t have the genes. A dear friend just started chemo yesterday for an aggressive breast cancer. She doesn’t have the gene mutations. Just turned 40. 

[scholastica]

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

I thought they had changed the recommendation to less than yearly, but I just got an email saying the recommendation is still yearly.

I am wondering if I should switch to 2.5 years or even 5 years.  I am otherwise pretty healthy & not well-endowed.  I have a pretty high deductible and don't want to go for the boob crush just for the fun of it.  😛

Your annual mammogram should be covered at 100%. It’s part of preventive care, unless you have a plan that was grandfathered in at the time the ACA passed. Well-woman and mammogram (at the recommended age) are both supposed to be covered.

 

 

Edited Saturday at 06:57 PM by scholastica

[SKL]

So I just googled and all the current sources say every other year.  However, this year, they reduced the recommended start age to 40 instead of 50.

[scholastica]

Coming back to add that my friend with bc is one of the healthiest people I know and also not well-endowed. 

[prairiewindmomma]

Yearly. I’ve had way too many friends with sudden never-cancer-in-my-family breast cancer. 

[SKL]

Just now, prairiewindmomma said:

Yearly. I’ve had way too many friends with sudden never-cancer-in-my-family breast cancer. 

That's interesting.  I wonder why that is?  I can't think of anyone I know who has had that happen.  I've lost several friends/relatives to lung cancer, but have few friends IRL who've fought breast cancer, and those that did had a family history.

[annandatje]

I had breast cancer in 2017.  I still have to get diagnostic mammograms and ultrasounds every six months to monitor certain areas.  Typically I now have birads score of 3.  Apparently it is not going to end until I’m six feet under 😃 .

[freesia]

Yearly. My mom and grandmother had bc. I don’t have the gene. So many women I know have had it. I’m not taking chances. I need to be better about self checking though. 

[Kassia]

52 minutes ago, SKL said:

That's interesting.  I wonder why that is?  I can't think of anyone I know who has had that happen.  I've lost several friends/relatives to lung cancer, but have few friends IRL who've fought breast cancer, and those that did had a family history.

just about everyone I know who has had breast cancer had no family history

[Kassia]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

I just schedule my tests online (mammogram and colonoscopy).  So far so good.

I need a doctor order for a mammogram so I am forced to do an annual well-woman exam every year just to get the mammogram order.  It really bugs me that I can't just do the screening without the doctor appt.

[Hannah]

The recommendation here is every two years.

[Faith-manor]

I do not do them. I have fibroids, runs in the family, and so every single mammogram triggers panic, and I have had more than my fair share of unnecessary biopsies. My 1st biopsy was at 17 before they even had mammograms. I am done going under the knife every few years. It bleeds us dry financially as the insurance has decided they aren't willing to pay anything anymore. So I hold out for a breast ultrasound which is better, and can detect changes much much better, and can tell the difference between fibroids and cysts vs. masses that need to be checked.

As always, the medical industry gets miffed, regardless of practitioner so they don't want to order the ultrasound. So my last was about 5 years ago. It doesn't really matter since insurance is a joke. Likely next year, I will call around, find the best cash pay price for an ultrasound, and have one done. I take the risk of not having them close together because this fibroid thing runs in the family, but we do not have the BrCA gene, and zero breast cancer. Heart disease seems to be the issue on my mom's side of the family, and stroke on my grandma's so those are the things I spend more time tackling. My sister lives in France, and they use breast ultrasound for diagnostics, and her doctor considers mammograms to be rather barbaric at this time. LOL, he has strong feelings. I think she now only has them once every five years. Her healthcare there is so much better than mine here, I try to follow French and Danish guidelines more than American.

[Faith-manor]

2 hours ago, scholastica said:

Annually. Only 10% of breast cancers are caused by the gene mutations. Don’t have a false sense of security because you don’t have the genes. A dear friend just started chemo yesterday for an aggressive breast cancer. She doesn’t have the gene mutations. Just turned 40. 

I understand that. I do. But my reality is that mammograms are worthless for my breasts, doctors refuse to order ultrasounds which do work, insurance doesn't want to pay for anything and I was constantly paying out of pocket for unnecessary biopsies. At some point, the need for sanity and wallet relief becomes a very real problem. I shouldn't have to make this choice, but for profit medicine, insurance companies ruling over all medical choice, and lack of practitioners who take the time to actually listen, dictates.how this goes for me.

[Annie G]

3 hours ago, scholastica said:

Your annual mammogram should be covered at 100%. It’s part of preventive care, unless you have a plan that was grandfathered in at the time the ACA passed. Well-woman and mammogram (at the recommended age) are both supposed to be covered.

 

 

My issue is that every one I’ve had has required a follow up - more imaging- and that has cost me between $400 and $700 OOP. I mean, it’s great that the screening is covered, but so many of my family and friends need the additional imaging and it’s making us space out the mammograms because it feels unnecessary. 
In my case, when I had my first mammogram I was told if I get a call for more imaging not to panic, that something like 80% of their mammogram patients need it. That sounds suspiciously high, but it’s been the same at all three places I’ve had a mammogram. 
Insurance needs to fully cover the entire mammogram - if they need more imagining, cover it fully. 

[Shelydon]

Annually 

[lmrich]

yearly and for a while every 6 months - I am 54

[Pawz4me]

Annually

[Acorn]

Every 6 months sigh. And they are expensive since they are now diagnostic not screening. I think that next year I will get recommendation for yearly with also yearly MRI. 

[Faith-manor]

2 hours ago, Annie G said:

My issue is that every one I’ve had has required a follow up - more imaging- and that has cost me between $400 and $700 OOP. I mean, it’s great that the screening is covered, but so many of my family and friends need the additional imaging and it’s making us space out the mammograms because it feels unnecessary. 
In my case, when I had my first mammogram I was told if I get a call for more imaging not to panic, that something like 80% of their mammogram patients need it. That sounds suspiciously high, but it’s been the same at all three places I’ve had a mammogram. 
Insurance needs to fully cover the entire mammogram - if they need more imagining, cover it fully. 

Right. We are having a ton of issues. One way insurance is weedling  out of paying anything that should be covered under the ACA is to label everything diagnostic and then sujlbject to deductible. Then they claim it is miscoded, wasn't done at the right place, by the right practitioner, you name it. Months and months and months of fighting, and the docs need their money. They do.not pay. AND they have all their little tricks to claim you violated the rules and therefore it isn't counted towards your deductible so you just keep paying well beyond the deductible, well beyond what they are supposed to finally cover.

In my case, since I have a breast diagnosis (fibroids), all mammograms are coded diagnostic, all ultrasounds, even a manual exam at an annual check up. BcBS Michigan has found every conceivable way to not cover anything, not count it towards deductible. Last year we paid $12,000 out of pocket on a deductible of $5500 for Mark, and they managed to refuse to count any of it towards the deductible so we didn't even end up meeting that. I am convinced we have insurance on paper and pay primo for it, but in reality we are uninsured. Mark is so furious, I think that at 60 he plans on not seeing a doctor again until he is 65 and has Medicare. As soon as he retires, I plan on getting the very cheapest, most worthless plan on the marketplace - should that even survive - and save the premium so I at least save a ton of money, and then I will seek out whom I want to pay cash to for services. 

I do plan on bloodwork at a reasonably priced lab before I go to France in 2025. Sis's doc said he would be happy to have me come in and go over the results. An office call is $40 for me as a non EU resident. 

[madteaparty]

I just want to say that there is more than one breast cancer gene even though only one is “famous” in the States (I’m not doing any genetic testing nor yearly mammograms but just wanted to throw that out there for those who care) 

[Miss Tick]

My doctor is of the opinion that the "every 2 years" requirement doesn't take into account the negative quality of life outcomes that result from that longer window of growth time before discovery.

[maryode]

I'm not a frequent poster, but I had to jump in and say that I was really low risk for BC, but still got an aggressive form of it at 42, in 2023. No family history of BC, and nothing to indicate that I'd be at risk--I followed all the rules, breastfed for years, etc. But I still got it. I 100% understand wanting to avoid some of the crazy healthcare issues but, truth be told, a boob squish for a few minutes is not nearly as bad as a year+ of chemo, radiation, and a mastectomy, plus all the uncertainty of having had cancer. Trust me. So for anyone for whom mammograms are not utterly useless or beyond frustrating, I'd encourage you to get your screening. You can always turn down a biopsy if it gets to that point, to simply watch and wait--but even my biopsy doctor didn't think what I had was cancer... and was wrong. More and more people are getting cancers at younger ages, and we owe it to our kiddos (and grandkiddos!) to try to be on top of things. I have multiple friends who've also gone through cancer (several breast, plus colon, and ovarian) in their 30s/40s.

I guess I'm just extremely grateful for my healthcare--I feel like everyone I worked with really wanted the very best for me, and while things weren't completely perfect, I'm still here, while a friend/acquaintance of mine isn't, because she didn't trust our healthcare system. She left three kids behind. 

I do completely support differing healthcare decisions, and I know everyone has their reasons, and often very good ones... so this is just for anyone who's on the fence. I am also concerned about overdiagnosis, plus the fact that mammograms can lead to a false sense of security, but I sure am glad I didn't wait any longer for more ideal diagnostic techniques and circumstances. I do think it's time to look at optimizing our processes, though, regarding recent research on dense breast tissue. 

So to answer the OP's question, I get a mammogram on Righty yearly, plus professional physical exams at least every 3 months right now. Even before cancer, I got them yearly.

[Lady Florida.]

19 hours ago, Kassia said:

I go every year for a screening, but almost always get called back and end up going again six months later due to extremely dense breast tissue.  It's frustrating and expensive especially since I think I'm low risk for breast cancer.  

This. If I'm a few weeks overdue I get a letter from my insurance company telling me to go. But they never pay for the ultrasound first, they always wait for my doctor to order it after I've had a regular one. 

I think both situations are a waste of money even though it costs me nothing. There's no history of breast cancer (or any cancer that I know of) in my family so I don't think I need an annual mammogram. If they're going to insist however, they should just go straight to the ultrasound rather than pay for both types of tests.

[historically accurate]

I'm going to echo @maryode. I am the first in my family to have breast cancer, and I have the Brca 1 gene. Someone has to be the first in the family for a  history to grow, and I guess it is me here. I no longer get mammograms, but that is because I have had a double mastectomy. I ended up not having to have chemo because my cancer was caught early on a mammogram (my first mammogram ever actually). 

[happypamama]

I got my first one three years ago at 44 and another one this year. I have lower than average risk, but I'm generally good about my other yearly checkups. I don't find the mammogram to be particularly uncomfortable; it's more just remembering to go schedule one. 

[SKL]

What happened to the report that all that radiation has concerning side effects though?

[Sneezyone]

I got my first at 48, this year. I DO NOT LIKE DOCTORS and avoid them until I can't. I have often been disrespected and treated poorly. I don't have the BRCA gene and have had no concerning breast issues in my immediate family. We have big breasts and dense tissue as the norm so I expect addl. scrutiny. I was/am slated for a follow up scan b/c of an anomaly detected in the same location as a milk duct infection that I had 16 years ago. I'm in no hurry to schedule b/c I know why that tissue looks different. I'm glad I did it, and don't think the precautions are overkill, just feel fab and unbothered. 

Edited Sunday at 03:45 PM by Sneezyone

[barnwife]

I had my first one last year (early 40s)). I was called back for more images and an ultrasound, and rightfully so. However, that was thousands of dollars OOP for me. Yes, thousands. I guess that is something we will now need to budget for. 

Frankly, the route a pp takes of just going straight to paying for the ultrasound OOP is probably the best route financially and medically speaking.

[SKL]

Considering how easy it is nowadays to find out whether or not we have those dangerous breast cancer genes, shouldn't they come up with different recommendations for those with and without the gene(s)?

[sbgrace]

I'm in the yearly recommended age range, and I get a mammogram and breast ultrasound (because of density) yearly. Insurance covers the mammogram as preventative, but I 80% pay out of pocket for the ultrasound.

[klmama]

OP, when I got one last year, it  had been 15 years since the first one.  The only change was that my breasts were not as dense as before. My new doctor encouraged me to consider going every two years, but she isn't going to hassle me about it, either.  FWIW, the only breast cancer in my family has been in a sister-in-law who found the lump herself not long after a mammogram hadn't shown anything.  Self-checks are still good.  

[scbusf]

Annually. I have several friends that been diagnosed with breast cancer in their 20s-40s with zero family history.

[SKL]

I'm so confused as to how so many people have had breast cancer with no family history.

Isn't family history a key risk factor?

What else is going on out there that is causing so many women to have breast cancer?

[prairiewindmomma]

6 hours ago, SKL said:

What happened to the report that all that radiation has concerning side effects though?

The amount of radiation you get from a standard 3d mammogram series is about .4 mS—an equivalent to about 7 weeks of average exposure from just walking around, living life. One cross country flight is 40 mS….ten times as much radiation.

[prairiewindmomma]

Does anyone know how to make your phone make the weird u symbol for the proper microsivert notation? What I did above is an alternative I’ve seen, but not standard.

[prairiewindmomma]

4 hours ago, SKL said:

Considering how easy it is nowadays to find out whether or not we have those dangerous breast cancer genes, shouldn't they come up with different recommendations for those with and without the gene(s)?

IIRC, most breast cancer is not genetic, and yes, they already have different recommendations for those with known genetics. Some women with strong genetic markers will get preemptive bilateral masectomies (like Angeline Jolie did).

[pinball]

Tuesdays and Thursdays

[Kassia]

1 hour ago, SKL said:

I'm so confused as to how so many people have had breast cancer with no family history.

Isn't family history a key risk factor?

What else is going on out there that is causing so many women to have breast cancer?

https://www.breastcancer.org/facts-statistics   "About 85% of breast cancers occur in women who have no family history of breast cancer. These occur due to genetic mutations that happen as a result of the aging process and life in general, rather than inherited mutations."

[SKL]

20 minutes ago, Kassia said:

https://www.breastcancer.org/facts-statistics   "About 85% of breast cancers occur in women who have no family history of breast cancer. These occur due to genetic mutations that happen as a result of the aging process and life in general, rather than inherited mutations."

Interesting - the American Cancer Society says having one first degree relative with breast cancer almost doubles the risk of breast cancer (and having more relatives obviously increases it even more).  I'm wondering how the math works.  The average risk is 13%.  If only 15% of this 13% of people have a family history, that would be only 2% of people having breast cancer and also having a family history of breast cancer?  Where is the double risk then?  I need to go eat, but maybe someone smart can explain this.

[Kassia]

40 minutes ago, SKL said:

, but maybe someone smart can explain this.

that leaves me out 😛  

 

I've had such a crazy chaotic day.  My brain is fried.

[KSera]

 

3 hours ago, SKL said:

I'm so confused as to how so many people have had breast cancer with no family history.

Isn't family history a key risk factor?

What else is going on out there that is causing so many women to have breast cancer?

 

44 minutes ago, SKL said:

Interesting - the American Cancer Society says having one first degree relative with breast cancer almost doubles the risk of breast cancer (and having more relatives obviously increases it even more).  I'm wondering how the math works.  The average risk is 13%.  If only 15% of this 13% of people have a family history, that would be only 2% of people having breast cancer and also having a family history of breast cancer?  Where is the double risk then?  I need to go eat, but maybe someone smart can explain this.

If the average risk is 13%, that means the people with double the risk due to family history have a 26% risk.