I have an opinion about everything.
What we want is to start at 25 to 30 asking a few questions of the women about family history so we know if that person needs to be on a high-risk channel to start with early in the game so that we're not finding out by accident they really should have been.... What is horrible is when we see women who get cancer and they're discovered with a late-stage diagnosis even in their thirties, sometimes even before they're eligible for screening, but once you talk to them you realize they had a really strong family history and they should have been getting screening all the way along.
Of course, I can't find my notes on this, but we would like to see annual screening from 40 until the person has under 10 years of life expectancy. That is shown, with modelling and with evidence, to save the most lives and to have the fewest treatment harms.
What we also would like to see is anybody who has dense breast tissue being offered supplemental screening with either ultrasound or MRI—most commonly ultrasound, but patients with very dense breast tissue should get MRI screening. In Europe, they're starting to do this.
That's about it.