Literature DB >> 21630122

Needle versus excisional biopsy for noninvasive and invasive breast cancer: report from the National Cancer Data Base, 2003-2008.

Richelle T Williams1, Katharine Yao, Andrew K Stewart, David J Winchester, Mary Turk, Addie Gorchow, Nora Jaskowiak, David P Winchester.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Needle biopsy to diagnose breast cancer may soon become a quality measure for which hospitals are held accountable. This study examines the utilization of needle versus excisional biopsy in a contemporary cohort of patients and identifies factors associated with biopsy type.
METHODS: Women with nonmetastatic, clinical Tis-T3 breast cancers diagnosed between 2003 and 2008 were selected from the National Cancer Data Base, which captures information from ~79% of breast cancers in the United States. Patients whose cancer was diagnosed by needle biopsy (fine-needle aspiration or core) were compared with patients diagnosed via excision, analyzing patient, hospital, and tumor characteristics. Logistic regression was used to identify important predictors of biopsy type.
RESULTS: Of 373,837 patients, 303,677 (81.2%) underwent needle biopsy while 70,160 (18.8%) had excisional biopsy to diagnose their cancer. The needle biopsy rate increased from 73.8 to 86.7% whereas excisional biopsy declined from 26.2 to 13.3% over the study period (P < 0.001). In 2008, patients were statistically significantly more likely to undergo excisional biopsy if they had stage 0 disease; were treated at low-volume (<25 cases/year), community, or Atlantic census region hospitals; were <40 years old at diagnosis; were less educated; or were Asian/Pacific Islander (P < 0.001). The median rate of needle biopsy at high-volume hospitals (≥140 cases/year) was 89.6%.
CONCLUSION: The use of needle biopsy is increasing. Tumor stage, hospital volume, and hospital location were the most statistically significant predictors of biopsy type. Rates of needle biopsy at high-volume hospitals suggest that appropriate utilization of this preferred diagnostic method should approach 90%.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21630122     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-011-1808-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  10 in total

Review 1.  Using the American College of Surgeons cancer registry to drive quality.

Authors:  Stephen B Edge; Daniel McKellar; Andrew K Stewart
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 3.840

2.  Surgeon and Facility Variation in the Use of Minimally Invasive Breast Biopsy in Texas.

Authors:  Nina P Tamirisa; Kristin M Sheffield; Abhishek D Parmar; Christopher J Zimmermann; Deepak Adhikari; Gabriela M Vargas; Yong-Fang Kuo; James S Goodwin; Taylor S Riall
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Underutilization of Needle Biopsy Before Breast Surgery: A Measure of Low-Value Care.

Authors:  Richard C Gilmore; Peiqi Wang; Katerina Kaczmarski; Susan Hutfless; David M Euhus; Lisa K Jacobs; Mehran Habibi; Julie Lange; Melissa Camp; Martin A Makary
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-01-29       Impact factor: 5.344

4.  Non-normal Screening Mammography Results, Lumpectomies, and Breast Cancer Reported by California Women, 2001-2009.

Authors:  Veronica L Irvin; Nancy Breen; Helen I Meissner; Benmei Liu; Robert M Kaplan
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2015-06-09

5.  Quality Of Breast Cancer Care In The US Territories: Insights From Medicare.

Authors:  Tracy M Layne; Jenerius A Aminawung; Pamela R Soulos; Marcella Nunez-Smith; Maxine A Nunez; Beth A Jones; Karen H Wang; Cary P Gross
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 6.301

6.  Ultrasensitive Detection of MCF-7 Cells with a Carbon Nanotube-Based Optoelectronic-Pulse Sensor Framework.

Authors:  Sophia S Y Chan; Denise Lee; Maria Prisca Meivita; Lunna Li; Yaw Sing Tan; Natasa Bajalovic; Desmond K Loke
Journal:  ACS Omega       Date:  2022-05-26

7.  Time trends and geographic variation in use of minimally invasive breast biopsy.

Authors:  Christopher J Zimmermann; Kristin M Sheffield; Casey B Duncan; Yimei Han; Catherine D Cooksley; Courtney M Townsend; Taylor S Riall
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Surgeon influence on use of needle biopsy in patients with breast cancer: a national medicare study.

Authors:  Jan M Eberth; Ying Xu; Grace L Smith; Yu Shen; Jing Jiang; Thomas A Buchholz; Kelly K Hunt; Dalliah M Black; Sharon H Giordano; Gary J Whitman; Wei Yang; Chan Shen; Linda Elting; Benjamin D Smith
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-06-09       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Choosing Wisely Africa: Ten Low-Value or Harmful Practices That Should Be Avoided in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Fidel Rubagumya; Gunita Mitera; Sidy Ka; Achille Manirakiza; Philippa Decuir; Susan C Msadabwe; Solange Adani Ifè; Emmanuella Nwachukwu; Naomi Ohene Oti; Hirondina Borges; Miriam Mutebi; Dafalla Abuidris; Verna Vanderpuye; Christopher M Booth; Nazik Hammad
Journal:  JCO Glob Oncol       Date:  2020-07

10.  The association between methods of biopsy and survival following breast cancer: A hospital registry based cohort study.

Authors:  Yek-Ching Kong; Nirmala Bhoo-Pathy; Michael O'Rorke; Shridevi Subramaniam; Nanthini T Bhoo-Pathy; Mee-Hoong See; Suniza Jamaris; Kean-Hooi Teoh; Anita Z Bustam; Lai-Meng Looi; Nur Aishah Taib; Cheng-Har Yip
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.