Under utilization of surveillance mammography among older breast cancer survivors.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Field TS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2359172 | biostudies-other | 2008 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Shared Molecules
Only show the datasets with similarity scores above: 0.5
Threshold
0.5
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeTo support shared decision-making, patient-facing resources are needed to complement recently published guidelines on approaches for surveillance mammography in breast cancer survivors aged ≥ 75 or with < 10-year life expectancy. We created a patient guide to facilitate discussions about surveillance mammography in older breast cancer survivors.MethodsThe "Are Mammograms Still Right for Me?" guide estimates future ipsilateral and contralateral breast (in-breast) cancer risks, general health, and the potential benefits/harms of mammography, with prompts for discussion. We conducted in-clinic acceptability testing of the guide by survivors and their clinicians at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center, including two community practices. Patients and clinicians received the guide ahead of a clinic visit and surveyed patients (pre-/post-visit) and clinicians (post-visit). Acceptability was defined as ≥ 75% of patients and clinicians reporting that the guide (a) should be recommended to others, (b) is clear, (c) is helpful, and (d) contains a suitable amount of information. We also elicited feedback on usability and mammography intentions.ResultsWe enrolled 45 patients and their 21 clinicians. Among those responding in post-visit surveys, 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians would recommend the guide to others; 33/37 (89%) patients and 15/16 (94%) clinicians felt everything/most things were clear. All other pre-specified acceptability criteria were met. Most patients reported strong intentions for mammography (100% pre-visit, 98% post-visit).ConclusionOncology clinicians and older breast cancer survivors found a guide to inform mammography decision-making acceptable and clear. A multisite clinical trial is needed to assess the guide's impact mammography utilization.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov-NCT03865654, posted March 7, 2019.
| S-EPMC9362353 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Clinical practice guidelines recommend yearly surveillance mammography for breast cancer survivors, yet many women do not receive this service. The objective of this study was to evaluate factors related to long-term surveillance mammography adherence among breast cancer survivors. We conducted a retrospective cohort study among women ? 18 years, diagnosed with incident stage I or II breast cancer between 1990 and 2008. We used medical record and administrative health plan data to ascertain covariates and receipt of surveillance mammography for up to 10 years after completing breast cancer treatment. Surveillance included post-diagnosis screening exams among asymptomatic women. We used multivariable repeated measures generalized estimating equation regression models to estimate odds ratios and robust 95 % confidence intervals to examine factors related to the annual receipt of surveillance mammography. The analysis included 3,965 women followed for a median of six surveillance years; 79 % received surveillance mammograms in year 1 but decreased to 63 % in year 10. In multivariable analyses, women, who were < 40 years or 80+ years of age (compared to 50-59 years), current smokers, had greater comorbidity, were diagnosed more recently, had stage II cancer, or were treated with mastectomy or breast conserving surgery without radiation, were less likely than other women to receive surveillance mammography. Women with outpatient visits during the year to primary care providers, oncologists, or both were more likely to undergo surveillance. In this large cohort study of women diagnosed with early-stage invasive breast cancer, we found that important subgroups of women are at high risk for non-adherence to surveillance recommendations, even among younger breast cancer survivors. Efforts should be undertaken to actively engage breast cancer survivors in managing long-term surveillance care.
| S-EPMC3935518 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe sought to examine associations of mammography utilization with comorbidities and functional limitations in older breast cancer survivors.MethodsFemale breast cancer survivors (N = 1064) identified in the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) who were aged ≥ 65 years were included for this study. Mammography use, major comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease, stroke, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, arthritis, chronic kidney disease, depression, and malignancy other than breast cancer), functional limitations (impairment of vision, audition, cognition, and mobility), and other covariates were measured by self-report. We used multivariable logistic regression models to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) of comorbidities and functional limitations. Subgroup analyses were conducted by age (65-74 vs. ≥ 75 years) and survival time (< 10 vs. ≥ 10 years), and interactions were examined by Wald tests.ResultsOf the 1064 respondents, 841 (79.0%) had comorbidities, 418 (39.3%) had functional limitations, and 744 (69.9%) underwent mammography last year. Overall, the mean age was 73.8 years (SD = 5.1 years) and 91.4% were white. The multivariable model identified inverse associations with mammography use for functional limitations (≥ 2 vs. 0: aOR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.39-0.95, p-trend = 0.09) but not comorbidities (≥ 2 vs. 0: aOR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.61-1.35, p-trend = 0.62). The Wald test did not find any significant interaction.ConclusionsA higher burden of functional limitations, not comorbidities, is associated with a lower rate of mammography use among older breast cancer survivors.Implications for cancer survivorsInterventions are needed to individualize surveillance mammography among older breast cancer survivors based on their health status.
| S-EPMC7855220 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network and American Society of Clinical Oncology recommend consideration of the use of echocardiography 6 to 12 months after completion of anthracycline-based chemotherapy in at-risk populations. Assessment of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide) has also been suggested by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Failure Society of America for the identification of Stage A (at risk) heart failure patients. The real-world frequency of the use of these tests in patients after receipt of anthracycline therapy, however, has not been studied previously.Methods and resultsIn this retrospective study, using administrative claims data from the OptumLabs Data Warehouse, we identified 31 447 breast cancer and lymphoma patients (age ≥18 years) who were treated with an anthracycline in the United States between January 1, 2008 and January 31, 2018. Continuous medical and pharmacy coverage was required for at least 6 months before the initial anthracycline dose and 12 months after the final dose. Only 36.1% of patients had any type of cardiac surveillance (echocardiography, BNP, or cardiac imaging) in the year following completion of anthracycline therapy (29.7% echocardiography). Surveillance rate increased from 37.5% in 2008 to 42.7% in 2018 (25.6% in 2008 to 40.5% echocardiography in 2018). Lymphoma patients had a lower likelihood of any surveillance compared with patients with breast cancer (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.74-0.85]; P<0.001). Patients with preexisting diagnoses of coronary artery disease and arrhythmia had the highest likelihood of cardiac surveillance (odds ratio, 1.54 [95% CI, 1.39-1.69] and odds ratio, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.3-1.53]; P<0.001 for both), although no single comorbidity was associated with a >50% rate of surveillance.ConclusionsThe majority of survivors of breast cancer and lymphoma who have received anthracycline-based chemotherapy do not undergo cardiac surveillance after treatment, including those with a history of cardiovascular comorbidities, such as heart failure.
| S-EPMC7101030 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrevious reports suggested risk of death and breast cancer varied by comorbidity and age in older women undergoing mammography. However, impacts of functional limitations remain unclear.MethodsWe used data from 238,849 women in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium-Medicare linked database (1999-2015) who had screening mammogram at ages 66-94 years. We estimated risk of breast cancer, breast cancer death, and non-breast cancer death by function-related indicator (FRI) which incorporated 16 claims-based items and was categorized as an ordinal variable (0, 1, and 2+). Fine and Gray proportional sub-distribution hazards models were applied with breast cancer and death treated as competing events. Risk estimates by FRI scores were adjusted by age and NCI comorbidity index separately and stratified by these factors.ResultsOverall, 9,252 women were diagnosed with breast cancer, 406 died of breast cancer, and 41,640 died from non-breast cancer causes. The 10-year age-adjusted invasive breast cancer risk slightly decreased with FRI score [FRI = 0: 4.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 3.8-4.1; FRI = 1: 3.9%, 95% CI = 3.7-4.2; FRI ≥ 2: 3.5%, 95% CI = 3.1-3.9). Risk of non-breast cancer death increased with FRI score (FRI = 0: 18.8%, 95% CI = 18.5-19.1; FRI = 1: 24.4%, 95% CI = 23.9-25.0; FRI ≥ 2: 39.8%, 95% CI = 38.8-40.9]. Risk of breast cancer death was low with minimal differences across FRI scores. NCI comorbidity index-adjusted models and stratified analyses yielded similar patterns.ConclusionsRisk of non-breast cancer death substantially increases with FRI score, whereas risk of breast cancer death is low regardless of functional status.ImpactOlder women with functional limitations should be informed that they may not benefit from screening mammography.
| S-EPMC8563300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background There is lack of consensus regarding the use of breast MRI for routine surveillance for second breast cancer events in women with a personal history of breast cancer. Purpose To compare performance of surveillance mammography with breast MRI. Materials and Methods This observational cohort study used prospectively collected data and included 13 266 women age 18 years and older (mean age, 60 years ± 13) with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent 33 938 mammographic examinations and 2506 breast MRI examinations from 2005 to 2012 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Women were categorized into two groups: mammography alone (n = 11 745) or breast MRI (n = 1521). Performance measures were calculated by using end-of-day assessment and occurrence of second breast cancer events within 1 year of imaging. Logistic regression was used to compare performance for breast MRI versus mammography alone, adjusting for women, examination, and primary breast cancer characteristics. Analysis was conducted on a per-examination basis. Results Breast MRI was associated with younger age at diagnosis, chemotherapy, and higher education and income. Raw performance measures for breast MRI versus mammography were as follows, respectively: cancer detection rates, 10.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.7, 14.8) versus 8.2 (95% CI: 7.3, 9.2) per 1000 examinations; sensitivity, 61.4% (27 of 44; 95% CI: 46.5%, 76.2%) versus 70.3% (279 of 397; 95% CI: 65.8%, 74.8%); and biopsy rate, 10.1% (253 of 2506; 95% CI: 8.9%, 11.3%) versus 4.0% (1343 of 33 938; 95% CI: 3.7%, 4.2%). In multivariable models, breast MRI was associated with higher biopsy rate (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% CI: 1.9, 2.7; P < .001) and cancer detection rate (OR, 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.7; P = .03) than mammography alone. However, there were no differences in sensitivity (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.4, 2.9; P = .84) or interval cancer rate (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6, 2.2; P = .70). Conclusion Comparison of the performance of surveillance breast MRI with mammography must account for patient characteristics. Whereas breast MRI leads to higher biopsy and cancer detection rates, there were no significant differences in sensitivity or interval cancers compared with mammography. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Newell in this issue.
| S-EPMC6694722 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCancer and cancer treatments may affect aging processes, altering the trajectory of cognitive aging, but the extant studies are limited in their intervals of assessment (two-five years). We studied the cognitive performance of a cohort of survivors and controls aged from 60 to 89 years utilizing cross-sectional cognitive performance data as an indicator of potential aging trajectories and contrasted these trends with longitudinal data collected over two years.MethodsFemale breast cancer survivors who had been diagnosed and treated at age 60 or older and were 5- to 15-year survivors (N = 328) and non-cancer controls (N = 158) were assessed at enrollment and at 8, 16, and 24 months with standard neuropsychological tests and comprehensive geriatric assessment.ResultsA cross-sectional baseline analysis found the expected inverse association of age with cognition in both groups, with survivors performing lower overall than controls in learning and memory (LM). Younger survivors, i.e., those under 75 years of age, exhibited lower performance in both LM and attention, and processing speed and executive function (APE), compared to controls, with no differences being observed between older survivors and controls, which tracked with deficit accumulation trends.ConclusionCognitive differences between the survivors and controls for the LM and APE domains were prominent in younger survivors, as was deficit accumulation, suggesting a mediating effect on cognition. Deficit accumulation may represent a modifiable risk factor in cancer survivorship that may be targeted for prevention and intervention.
| S-EPMC10296698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of breast cancer in developed countries has steadily risen over recent decades. Immediate and long-term health needs of patients, including preventive care and screening services, are receiving increasing attention. A question still unresolved is whether breast cancer survivors should receive mammographic surveillance in the clinical or screening setting and, thus, whether they should be excluded from, or invited to, organised mammography screening programmes. The objective of this article is to discuss the many contradictory aspects of this matter.DiscussionProblems with mammographic surveillance of breast cancer survivors include: weak evidence of a reduction in mortality; lack of evidence in favour of one setting or the other; lack of evidence-based guidelines for the frequency and duration of surveillance; disproportionate emphasis placed on the first few years post-treatment, probably dictated by surgical and oncological priorities; a variety of screening policies, as these women are permanently or temporarily or partially excluded from many - but not all - organised screening programmes worldwide; an even greater disparity in follow-up protocols used in the clinical setting; a paucity of data on compliance to mammographic surveillance in both settings; and a difficulty in coordinating the roles of health care providers. In the future, the use of mammography in breast cancer survivors will be influenced by the inclusion of women aged > 69 years in organised screening programmes and the implementation of multidisciplinary breast units, and will probably be investigated by research activities on individual risk assessment and risk-tailored screening. In the interim, current problems can be partially alleviated with some technical solutions in screening data recording, patient flows, and care coordination.SummaryMammographic surveillance of breast cancer survivors is situated at the crossroads of numerous different specialist areas of breast cancer control and management. The solutions for current problems probably lie in some important modifications in the conventional screening procedure that are underway or under study. These developments appear to be directed towards a partial modification of the screening rationale, with an adaptation to meet the diversified breast care needs of women. The complexity of the matter constitutes a call to action for several entities to eliminate the barriers to effective research in this field.
| S-EPMC3203044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDecision aids for breast cancer screening are increasingly being used by physicians, but the association between physician practice decision-aid use and mammography rates remains uncertain. Using national data, this study examines the association between practice-level decision-aid use and mammography use among older women.MethodsPhysician practice responses to the 2017/2018 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n=1,236) were linked to 2016 and 2017 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary data from eligible beneficiaries (n=439,684) aged 65-74 years. In 2021, multivariable generalized linear models estimated the association of practice decision-aid use for breast cancer screening and advanced health information technology functions with mammography use, controlling for practice and beneficiary characteristics.ResultsOverall, 60.1% of eligible beneficiaries had a screening mammogram, and 37.3% of physician practices routinely used decision aids for breast cancer screening. In adjusted analyses, advanced health information technology functions (OR=1.19, p=0.04) were associated with mammography use, but practice use of decision aids was not (OR=0.95, p=0.21). Beneficiary clinical and socioeconomic characteristics, including race, comorbidities, Medicare and Medicaid eligibility, and median household income were more strongly associated with mammography use than practice-level decision-aid use or advanced health information technology functions.ConclusionsHealth information technology‒enabled automation of mammography reminders and other advanced health information technology functions may support mammography, whereas breast cancer decision aids may reduce patients' propensities to be screened through the alignment of their preferences and screening decision. More resources may be needed for decision aids to be routinely implemented to improve solicitation of patient preferences and targeting of mammography services.
| S-EPMC9509405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose To establish performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography and assess performance trends over time in U.S. community practice. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study measured the performance of digital screening mammography interpreted by 359 radiologists across 95 facilities in six Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries. The study included 1 682 504 digital screening mammograms performed between 2007 and 2013 in 792 808 women. Performance measures were calculated according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, 5th edition, and were compared with published benchmarks by the BCSC, the National Mammography Database, and performance recommendations by expert opinion. Benchmarks were derived from the distribution of performance metrics across radiologists and were presented as 50th (median), 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles, with graphic presentations using smoothed curves. Results Mean screening performance measures were as follows: abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), 11.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5, 11.6); cancers detected per 1000 screens, or cancer detection rate (CDR), 5.1 (95% CI: 5.0, 5.2); sensitivity, 86.9% (95% CI: 86.3%, 87.6%); specificity, 88.9% (95% CI: 88.8%, 88.9%); false-negative rate per 1000 screens, 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7, 0.8); positive predictive value (PPV) 1, 4.4% (95% CI: 4.3%, 4.5%); PPV2, 25.6% (95% CI: 25.1%, 26.1%); PPV3, 28.6% (95% CI: 28.0%, 29.3%); cancers stage 0 or 1, 76.9%; minimal cancers, 57.7%; and node-negative invasive cancers, 79.4%. Recommended CDRs were achieved by 92.1% of radiologists in community practice, and 97.1% achieved recommended ranges for sensitivity. Only 59.0% of radiologists achieved recommended AIRs, and only 63.0% achieved recommended levels of specificity. Conclusion The majority of radiologists in the BCSC surpass cancer detection recommendations for screening mammography; however, AIRs continue to be higher than the recommended rate for almost half of radiologists interpreting screening mammograms. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.
| S-EPMC5375631 | biostudies-literature