Literature DB >> 23184400

Cost-effectiveness of alternating magnetic resonance imaging and digital mammography screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers.

Jessica E Cott Chubiz1, Janie M Lee, Michael E Gilmore, Chung Y Kong, Kathryn P Lowry, Elkan F Halpern, Pamela M McMahon, Paula D Ryan, G Scott Gazelle.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Current clinical guidelines recommend earlier, more intensive breast cancer screening with both magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and mammography for women with breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutations. Unspecified details of screening schedules are a challenge for implementing guidelines.
METHODS: A Markov Monte Carlo computer model was used to simulate screening in asymptomatic women who were BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Three dual-modality strategies were compared with digital mammography (DM) alone: 1) DM and MRI alternating at 6-month intervals beginning at age 25 years (Alt25), 2) annual MRI beginning at age 25 years with alternating DM added at age 30 years (MRI25/Alt30), and 3) DM and MRI alternating at 6-month intervals beginning at age 30 years (Alt30). Primary outcomes were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), lifetime costs (in 2010 US dollars), and incremental cost-effectiveness (dollars per QALY gained). Additional outcomes included potential harms of screening, and lifetime costs stratified into component categories (screening and diagnosis, treatment, mortality, and patient time costs).
RESULTS: All 3 dual-modality screening strategies increased QALYs and costs. Alt30 screening had the lowest incremental costs per additional QALY gained (BRCA1, $74,200 per QALY; BRCA2, $215,700 per QALY). False-positive test results increased substantially with dual-modality screening and occurred more frequently in BRCA2 carriers. Downstream savings in both breast cancer treatment and mortality costs were outweighed by increases in up-front screening and diagnosis costs. The results were influenced most by estimates of breast cancer risk and MRI costs.
CONCLUSIONS: Alternating MRI and DM screening at 6-month intervals beginning at age 30 years was identified as a clinically effective approach to applying current guidelines, and was more cost-effective in BRCA1 gene mutation carriers compared with BRCA2 gene mutation carriers.
Copyright © 2012 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23184400      PMCID: PMC3586945          DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27864

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  47 in total

1.  Performance benchmarks for screening mammography.

Authors:  Robert D Rosenberg; Bonnie C Yankaskas; Linn A Abraham; Edward A Sickles; Constance D Lehman; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Donald L Weaver; William E Barlow; Rachel Ballard-Barbash
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Cost-effectiveness of screening BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with breast magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Sylvia K Plevritis; Allison W Kurian; Bronislava M Sigal; Bruce L Daniel; Debra M Ikeda; Frank E Stockdale; Alan M Garber
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Christiane K Kuhl; Simone Schrading; Claudia C Leutner; Nuschin Morakkabati-Spitz; Eva Wardelmann; Rolf Fimmers; Walther Kuhn; Hans H Schild
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2005-11-20       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  The cost of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with early-stage breast carcinoma.

Authors:  Nina Oestreicher; Scott D Ramsey; Jeannine S McCune; Hannah M Linden; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2005-11-15       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Process utility in breast biopsy.

Authors:  J Shannon Swan; William F Lawrence; Jessica Roy
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

6.  Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening.

Authors:  Etta D Pisano; Constantine Gatsonis; Edward Hendrick; Martin Yaffe; Janet K Baum; Suddhasatta Acharyya; Emily F Conant; Laurie L Fajardo; Lawrence Bassett; Carl D'Orsi; Roberta Jong; Murray Rebner
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-09-16       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  A cost-effectiveness analysis of adjuvant trastuzumab regimens in early HER2/neu-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Allison W Kurian; Rebecca Newton Thompson; Allison F Gaw; Sally Arai; Rafael Ortiz; Alan M Garber
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-02-20       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Performance benchmarks for diagnostic mammography.

Authors:  Edward A Sickles; Diana L Miglioretti; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Berta M Geller; Jessica W T Leung; Robert D Rosenberg; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Bonnie C Yankaskas
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Screening with magnetic resonance imaging and mammography of a UK population at high familial risk of breast cancer: a prospective multicentre cohort study (MARIBS).

Authors:  M O Leach; C R M Boggis; A K Dixon; D F Easton; R A Eeles; D G R Evans; F J Gilbert; I Griebsch; R J C Hoff; P Kessar; S R Lakhani; S M Moss; A Nerurkar; A R Padhani; L J Pointon; D Thompson; R M L Warren
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 May 21-27       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  Histopathology of BRCA1- and BRCA2-associated breast cancer.

Authors:  Emiliano Honrado; Javier Benítez; José Palacios
Journal:  Crit Rev Oncol Hematol       Date:  2006-03-10       Impact factor: 6.312

View more
  21 in total

Review 1.  Breast cancer screening: an evidence-based update.

Authors:  Mackenzie S Fuller; Christoph I Lee; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  Med Clin North Am       Date:  2015-03-05       Impact factor: 5.456

Review 2.  Imaging-based screening: understanding the controversies.

Authors:  Diana L Lam; Pari V Pandharipande; Janie M Lee; Constance D Lehman; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Risk-Adjusted Prevention. Perspectives on the Governance of Entitlements to Benefits in the Case of Genetic (Breast Cancer) Risks.

Authors:  Friedhelm Meier; Anke Harney; Kerstin Rhiem; Silke Neusser; Anja Neumann; Matthias Braun; Jürgen Wasem; Stefan Huster; Peter Dabrock; Rita Katharina Schmutzler
Journal:  Recent Results Cancer Res       Date:  2021

4.  MRI Screening of BRCA Mutation Carriers: Comparison of Standard Protocol and Abbreviated Protocols With and Without T2-Weighted Images.

Authors:  Isaac Daimiel Naranjo; Julie Sogani; Carolina Saccarelli; Joao V Horvat; Varadan Sevilimedu; Mary C Hughes; Roberto Lo Gullo; Maxine S Jochelson; Jeffrey Reiner; Katja Pinker
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2021-12-22       Impact factor: 6.582

5.  MARIA M4: clinical evaluation of a prototype ultrawideband radar scanner for breast cancer detection.

Authors:  Alan W Preece; Ian Craddock; Mike Shere; Lyn Jones; Helen L Winton
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2016-07-20

6.  Outcomes of genetic evaluation for hereditary cancer syndromes in unaffected individuals.

Authors:  Shanna L Gustafson; Victoria M Raymond; Monica L Marvin; Tobias Else; Erika Koeppe; Elena M Stoffel; Jessica N Everett
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 2.375

Review 7.  Breast density implications and supplemental screening.

Authors:  Athina Vourtsis; Wendie A Berg
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-09-25       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  An international survey of surveillance schemes for unaffected BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Authors:  Dana Madorsky-Feldman; Miri Sklair-Levy; Tamar Perri; Yael Laitman; Shani Paluch-Shimon; Rita Schmutzler; Kerstin Rhiem; Jenny Lester; Beth Y Karlan; Christian F Singer; Tom Van Maerken; Kathleen Claes; Joan Brunet; Angel Izquierdo; Alex Teulé; Jong Won Lee; Sung-Won Kim; Banu Arun; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubinski; Katherine Tucker; Nicola K Poplawski; Liliana Varesco; Luigina Ada Bonelli; Saundra S Buys; Gillian Mitchell; Marc Tischkowitz; Anne-Marie Gerdes; Caroline Seynaeve; Mark Robson; Ava Kwong; Nadine Tung; Nalven Tessa; Susan M Domchek; Andrew K Godwin; Johanna Rantala; Brita Arver; Eitan Friedman
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2016-04-27       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Optimal Screening in Breast Cancer Survivors With Dense Breasts on Mammography.

Authors:  Habib Rahbar; Janie M Lee; Christoph I Lee
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-07-24       Impact factor: 50.717

Review 10.  Expanding the indications for MRI in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer: what is best practice?

Authors:  Christobel Saunders; Donna Taylor
Journal:  J Med Radiat Sci       Date:  2015-01-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.