The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Advocacy Alliance is calling for increased education and access to screening for women with dense breasts.
With a recent Harris survey finding that 95% of women older than 40 do not know their breast density, and that less than 10% of doctors are talking to their patients about their breast density and risk for cancer, interim president of the Komen Advocacy Alliance Nancy Brinker said that doctors should routinely inform women about their breast density and relative cancer risk.
The alliance said it's also advocating that doctors discuss with their patients with dense breasts what screening tools might be appropriate for them. It's also important that insurance cover additional screening methods, as appropriate, and that more effective technologies be developed, Brinker said.
The alliance said it believes that increasing the variety of available screening technologies is critical to a woman's right to access potentially life-saving screening tools.
Related Reading
Breast density linked to higher breast cancer risk after DCIS, October 7, 2010
New imaging tools address challenges of dense breast tissue, September 14, 2010
Vitamin D, calcium intake not linked to postmenopausal breast density, August 16, 2010
Researchers take a 3D approach to breast density, July 2, 2010
Conn. breast density law causes conundrum for mammo sites, April 29, 2010
Copyright © 2010 AuntMinnie.com
![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=crop&h=100&q=70&w=100)
![A normal mammogram confirmed by three-year radiologic follow-up illustrates reader-marked regions of interest (ROIs) during (A) unaided (round 1) and (B) artificial intelligence (AI)–assisted (round 2) reading. Each colored dot represents an ROI for recall by a human reader. Readers could mark more than one ROI per case, represented by multiple dots of the same color. During AI-assisted reading, the AI system displayed three visible prompts: two with suspicion of malignancy scores of 35% (left mediolateral oblique [L MLO] and craniocaudal [L CC]) and one with a suspicion of malignancy score of 10% (right craniocaudal [R CC]), shown as polygonal overlays. Without AI, six of 10 readers (60%) marked a false-positive ROI. With AI assistance, this fell to two of 10 (20%). R MLO = right mediolateral oblique.](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/07/2026-07-14-radiology-mammogram-ai-auto-bias.H0bYO8QlWs.jpg?auto=format%2Ccompress&dpr=2&fit=crop&h=167&q=70&w=250)
