Literature DB >> 10540638

Cost-effectiveness of MR imaging and core-needle biopsy in the preoperative work-up of suspicious breast lesions.

J M Hrung1, C P Langlotz, S G Orel, K R Fox, M D Schnall, J S Schwartz.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the clinical and economic consequences of the use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and core-needle biopsy (CNB) to avert excisional biopsy (EXB).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was constructed to compare MR imaging, CNB, and EXB without preoperative testing in a woman with a suspicious breast lesion. Stage-specific cancer prevalence, tumor recurrence, progression rates, and MR imaging and CNB sensitivity and specificity were obtained from the literature. Cost estimates were obtained from the literature and from the Medicare fee schedule.
RESULTS: EXB without preoperative testing was associated with the greatest quality-adjusted life expectancy, followed by MR imaging and CNB; life expectancies were 17.409, 17.405, and 17.398 years, respectively. EXB resulted in the greatest lifetime treatment cost ($31,438), followed by MR imaging ($29,072) and CNB ($28,573). Results were robust over a wide range of cancer prevalence, stage distribution, tumor progression rates, and procedure and treatment costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios showed that preoperative testing was cost-effective, but the choice between MR imaging and CNB was highly dependent on the accuracy of each test and to patient preferences.
CONCLUSION: Preoperative testing of most suspicious breast lesions was cost-effective. More precise estimates of MR imaging and CNB test performance characteristics are needed. Until those are available, patient preferences should inform individual decisions regarding preoperative testing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10540638     DOI: 10.1148/radiology.213.1.r99oc5139

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  7 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of two vacuum-assisted breast biopsy systems: Mammotome and Vacora.

Authors:  C A Pistolese; A M Ciarrapico; F Della Gatta; T Perretta; E Cossu; F Bolacchi; E Bonanno; G Simonetti
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-05-30       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Quality-of-life assessment of fibroid treatment options and outcomes.

Authors:  Fiona M Fennessy; Chung Yin Kong; Clare M Tempany; J Shannon Swan
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 3.  The economic burden of incidentally detected findings.

Authors:  Alexander Ding; Jonathan D Eisenberg; Pari V Pandharipande
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 2.303

4.  Initial development of the Temporary Utilities Index: a multiattribute system for classifying the functional health impact of diagnostic testing.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; Jun Ying; James Stahl; Chung Yin Kong; Beverly Moy; Jessica Roy; Elkan Halpern
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  [Magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative staging for breast cancer: pros and contras].

Authors:  C K Kuhl; M Braun
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 0.635

6.  What is the optimal threshold at which to recommend breast biopsy?

Authors:  Elizabeth S Burnside; Jagpreet Chhatwal; Oguzhan Alagoz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Cost-effectiveness of stereotactic large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast lesions compared to open-breast biopsy.

Authors:  J H Groenewoud; R M Pijnappel; M E van den Akker-Van Marle; E Birnie; T Buijs-van der Woude; W P Th M Mali; H J de Koning; E Buskens
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2004-01-26       Impact factor: 7.640

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.