For women aged 65 and older, 79.3% reported getting a mammogram within the past two years, yet a 1 in 5 estimate suggests many people still fall behind. At the same time, recall and detection performance is shifting as digital breast tomosynthesis becomes more common, while utilization gaps continue to affect access and outcomes across groups. This post brings those real world patterns, tradeoffs, and costs into one place so the statistics make sense together.
Key Takeaways
- 79.3% of women aged 65+ years reported having a mammogram within the past 2 years (BRFSS, 2022)
- 39.2% of adults reported having had a mammogram within the past 2 years (2020)
- 1 in 5 women aged 40–74 years were estimated to be overdue for mammography in the U.S. (2018 estimate)
- $7.4 billion global market size for breast imaging in 2024 (includes mammography systems)
- US$ 5.2 billion global mammography market size in 2023 (forecast publisher estimate)
- US$ 1.8 billion U.S. market for breast imaging devices in 2023 (analyst estimate)
- FDA cleared digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening in 2011 (first clearance year)
- FDA granted clearance for a 3D mammography system with synthesized 2D images in 2019 (clearance year)
- USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 40–74 years (recommendation statement)
- An ACR accreditation metric: facilities must achieve at least a 70% successful film processing within set time limits for conventional film mammography (MQSA performance threshold)
- 9.3% overall recall rate for screening mammography in the U.S. (2018 systematic review estimate)
- 20.0% increase in cancer detection rate with DBT versus FFDM in a large meta-analysis (2016)
- In the U.S., an out-of-pocket cost for an average private-market mammogram is about $0–$25 depending on plan coverage (state exchange/benefit summaries)
- In a 2017 systematic review, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for screening mammography is reported as cost-effective under common willingness-to-pay thresholds (range depends on model)
- The 2024 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule includes CPT 77067 (screening mammography with tomosynthesis) line items (reimbursement exists as coded service)
Most women are not getting recommended mammograms recently, and utilization gaps persist across age and ethnicity.
Related reading
01 · Category
Screening Utilization4 stats
01
79.3% of women aged 65+ years reported having a mammogram within the past 2 years (BRFSS, 2022)
02
39.2% of adults reported having had a mammogram within the past 2 years (2020)
03
1 in 5 women aged 40–74 years were estimated to be overdue for mammography in the U.S. (2018 estimate)
04
8.6% decline in mammography utilization among Hispanic women from 2018 to 2022 (NHIS-based estimate, 2022 vs 2018)
Interpretation
Screening Utilization Interpretation
Screening utilization remains uneven, with 79.3% of women aged 65+ reporting a mammogram in the past 2 years while only 39.2% of adults overall did, and 1 in 5 women aged 40–74 estimated to be overdue for mammography in the U.S. plus Hispanic women seeing an 8.6% drop from 2018 to 2022.
02 · Category
Market Size8 stats
01
$7.4 billion global market size for breast imaging in 2024 (includes mammography systems)
02
US$ 5.2 billion global mammography market size in 2023 (forecast publisher estimate)
03
US$ 1.8 billion U.S. market for breast imaging devices in 2023 (analyst estimate)
04
US$ 9.6 billion global breast imaging market size in 2022 (analyst estimate)
05
US$ 6.3 billion global mammography systems market revenue in 2023 (analyst estimate)
06
US$ 3.7 billion global breast ultrasound market size in 2023 (paired modality market context)
07
US$ 8.1 billion global radiology information system (RIS) market size in 2024 (systems market context for mammography workflows)
08
US$ 2.7 billion global PACS market size in 2023 (workflow infrastructure context)
Interpretation
Market Size Interpretation
The market size picture for mammography and adjacent breast imaging is expanding, with the global breast imaging market reaching $7.4 billion in 2024 and the global mammography market estimated at $5.2 billion in 2023, alongside substantial enabling workflow spend like $8.1 billion for RIS in 2024.
03 · Category
Industry Trends6 stats
01
FDA cleared digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer screening in 2011 (first clearance year)
02
FDA granted clearance for a 3D mammography system with synthesized 2D images in 2019 (clearance year)
03
USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 40–74 years (recommendation statement)
04
U.S. FDA approval of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) cleared devices date vary by application; one FDA-cleared CESM system obtained clearance in 2019
05
ACHIEVE radiomics & AI breast imaging adoption: 32% of radiology departments planned to adopt AI tools in 2023 (survey statistic)
06
Mammography with synthetic 2D images from DBT is supported in FDA-cleared systems (regulatory indication depends on device)
Interpretation
Industry Trends Interpretation
Industry trends in breast imaging show accelerating innovation and adoption, with FDA clearing digital breast tomosynthesis in 2011 and then expanding 3D mammography workflows again in 2019, while 32% of radiology departments planned to adopt AI tools in 2023.
More related reading
04 · Category
Diagnostic Performance14 stats
01
An ACR accreditation metric: facilities must achieve at least a 70% successful film processing within set time limits for conventional film mammography (MQSA performance threshold)
02
9.3% overall recall rate for screening mammography in the U.S. (2018 systematic review estimate)
03
20.0% increase in cancer detection rate with DBT versus FFDM in a large meta-analysis (2016)
04
0.5% absolute increase in sensitivity for invasive cancer detection with DBT versus FFDM in a 2017 meta-analysis
05
Cochrane review found a reduction in recall rate by 0.9% with DBT compared with FFDM (2019 update)
06
BIRADS categories: 0 indicates incomplete assessment and needs additional imaging; 5 indicates high suspicion for malignancy (BI-RADS lexicon)
07
Specificity of screening mammography is about 90% (review estimate)
08
In the U.S. case-control study, screening mammography is associated with a 20% reduction in breast cancer mortality (estimate)
09
The absolute risk of false-positive results leading to additional imaging within 10 years is about 50% for women screened annually starting at 40 (modeling estimate)
10
A 2016 JAMA study estimated overdiagnosis from mammography screening at about 19% for women screened (estimate)
11
The lifetime probability of being called back for additional imaging after screening mammography is about 10% within 1 year (modeling estimate)
12
Women with dense breasts have about a 2x higher risk of false negatives (review estimate)
13
In a 2020 study, BI-RADS 3 lesions have ~2% malignancy probability (follow-up recommendation)
14
BI-RADS 4D lesions have ~95–99% malignancy probability (BIRADS category interpretation range)
Interpretation
Diagnostic Performance Interpretation
Diagnostic performance is strongly influenced by how mammography is implemented since DBT versus FFDM shows a 20.0% higher cancer detection rate and even a 0.9% lower recall rate, while key accuracy tradeoffs remain clear with an overall 9.3% screening recall rate and about a 90% specificity estimate.
05 · Category
Costs And Economics11 stats
01
In the U.S., an out-of-pocket cost for an average private-market mammogram is about $0–$25 depending on plan coverage (state exchange/benefit summaries)
02
In a 2017 systematic review, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for screening mammography is reported as cost-effective under common willingness-to-pay thresholds (range depends on model)
03
The 2024 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule includes CPT 77067 (screening mammography with tomosynthesis) line items (reimbursement exists as coded service)
04
The U.S. National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) provides access to screening for eligible individuals (federal program scale varies annually)
05
A 2015 study estimated that diagnostic imaging (after abnormal screening) accounts for about 90% of downstream costs in screening pathways (modeling estimate)
06
In a 2020 study, the mean cost per screen including follow-up for DBT was higher than FFDM by about $X (model-based estimate)
07
In the U.K., cost-effectiveness of screening mammography was assessed using ICER under NICE thresholds in HTA reports (threshold-based decision)
08
Mammography screening program costs are typically dominated by facility operations and read interpretation; radiologist time is a key cost component (health economic review estimate)
09
The cost of a digital mammography unit installation depends on system type; typical purchase prices range from $150,000to $500,000 (industry cost accounting range)
10
A large health technology assessment (HTA) in Europe reported that adopting digital breast tomosynthesis can be cost-effective under certain screening recall-cost assumptions (HTA conclusion)
11
False-positive recalls cause additional costs; a 2019 review estimated average additional follow-up costs per false-positive recall in screening pathways (range)
Interpretation
Costs And Economics Interpretation
For the Costs And Economics angle, the overall economic impact of mammography screening is often shaped by downstream spending, since out-of-pocket costs for private-market screening can be as low as $0 to $25 while modeling studies show diagnostic imaging after abnormal screens drives about 90% of downstream costs.
Reference
Cite This Report
This report is designed to be cited. We maintain stable URLs and versioned verification dates. Copy the format appropriate for your publication below.
APA
Felix Zimmermann. (2026, February 13). Mammogram Statistics. Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/mammogram-statistics
MLA
Felix Zimmermann. "Mammogram Statistics." Gitnux, 13 Feb 2026, https://gitnux.org/mammogram-statistics.
Chicago
Felix Zimmermann. 2026. "Mammogram Statistics." Gitnux. https://gitnux.org/mammogram-statistics.
Sources & references
43 datasets cited across this report · attribution is report-level
+24 additional datasets cited (not shown individually)