Literature DB >> 24247482

Rapid increase in breast magnetic resonance imaging use: trends from 2000 to 2011.

Natasha K Stout1, Larissa Nekhlyudov2, Lingling Li1, Elisabeth S Malin3, Dennis Ross-Degnan1, Diana S M Buist4, Marjorie A Rosenberg5, Marina Alfisher6, Suzanne W Fletcher1.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is highly sensitive for detecting breast cancer. Low specificity, cost, and little evidence regarding mortality benefits, however, limit recommendations for its use to high-risk women. How breast MRI is actually used in community settings is unknown.
OBJECTIVE: To describe breast MRI trends and indications in a community setting. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study at a not-for-profit health plan and multispecialty group medical practice in New England of 10,518 women aged 20 years and older enrolled in the health plan for at least 1 year who had at least 1 breast MRI between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2011. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Breast MRI counts were obtained from claims data. Clinical indication (screening, diagnostic evaluation, staging or treatment, or surveillance) was determined using a prediction model developed from electronic medical records on a subset of participants. Breast cancer risk status was assessed using claims data and, for the subset, also through electronic medical record review. RESULTS; Breast MRI use increased more than 20-fold from 6.5 per 10,000 women in 2000 to 130.7 per 10,000 in 2009. Use then declined and stabilized to 104.8 per 10,000 by 2011. Screening and surveillance, rare indications in 2000, together accounted for 57.6% of MRI use by 2011; 30.1% had a claims-documented personal history and 51.7% a family history of breast cancer, whereas 3.5% of women had a documented genetic mutation. In the subset of women with electronic medical records who received screening or surveillance MRIs, only 21.0% had evidence of meeting American Cancer Society (ACS) criteria for breast MRI. Conversely, only 48.4% of women with documented deleterious genetic mutations received breast MRI screening. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast MRI use increased steeply over 10 years and then stabilized, especially for screening and surveillance among women with family or personal history of breast cancer; most women receiving screening and surveillance breast MRIs lacked documented evidence of meeting ACS criteria, and many women with mutations were not screened. Efforts are needed to ensure that breast MRI use and documentation are focused on those women who will benefit most.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24247482      PMCID: PMC4145846          DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.11958

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Intern Med        ISSN: 2168-6106            Impact factor:   21.873


  40 in total

1.  Permutation tests for joinpoint regression with applications to cancer rates.

Authors:  H J Kim; M P Fay; E J Feuer; D N Midthune
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2000-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 2.  Breast MRI.

Authors:  S E Harms; D P Flamig
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2001 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.605

3.  Community-based mammography practice: services, charges, and interpretation methods.

Authors:  R Edward Hendrick; Gary R Cutter; Eric A Berns; Connie Nakano; Joseph Egger; Patricia A Carney; Linn Abraham; Stephen H Taplin; Carl J D'Orsi; William Barlow; Joann G Elmore
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 4.  Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 25.391

5.  Results of MRI screening for breast cancer in high-risk patients with LCIS and atypical hyperplasia.

Authors:  Elisa Rush Port; Anna Park; Patrick I Borgen; Elizabeth Morris; Leslie L Montgomery
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2007-01-07       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  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

7.  American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography.

Authors:  Debbie Saslow; Carla Boetes; Wylie Burke; Steven Harms; Martin O Leach; Constance D Lehman; Elizabeth Morris; Etta Pisano; Mitchell Schnall; Stephen Sener; Robert A Smith; Ellen Warner; Martin Yaffe; Kimberly S Andrews; Christy A Russell
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 508.702

Review 8.  Cascade effects of medical technology.

Authors:  Richard A Deyo
Journal:  Annu Rev Public Health       Date:  2001-10-25       Impact factor: 21.981

9.  American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 update of the breast cancer follow-up and management guidelines in the adjuvant setting.

Authors:  James L Khatcheressian; Antonio C Wolff; Thomas J Smith; Eva Grunfeld; Hyman B Muss; Victor G Vogel; Francine Halberg; Mark R Somerfield; Nancy E Davidson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2006-10-10       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Cost-effectiveness of screening with contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging vs X-ray mammography of women at a high familial risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  I Griebsch; J Brown; C Boggis; A Dixon; M Dixon; D Easton; R Eeles; D G Evans; F J Gilbert; J Hawnaur; P Kessar; S R Lakhani; S M Moss; A Nerurkar; A R Padhani; L J Pointon; J Potterton; D Thompson; L W Turnbull; L G Walker; R Warren; M O Leach
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2006-10-09       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  36 in total

1.  Breast magnetic resonance imaging: are those who need it getting it?

Authors:  S Tan; J David; L Lalonde; M El Khoury; M Labelle; R Younan; E Patocskai; J Richard; I Trop
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Factors Associated with Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Use among Medicare Beneficiaries with Nonmetastatic Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Louise M Henderson; Julie Weiss; Rebecca A Hubbard; Cristina O'Donoghue; Wendy B DeMartini; Diana S M Buist; Karla Kerlikowske; Martha Goodrich; Beth Virnig; Anna N A Tosteson; Constance D Lehman; Tracy Onega
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 2.431

3.  Screening magnetic resonance imaging recommendations and outcomes in patients at high risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Sima Ehsani; Roberta M Strigel; Erica Pettke; Lee Wilke; Amye J Tevaarwerk; Wendy B DeMartini; Kari B Wisinski
Journal:  Breast J       Date:  2015-03-17       Impact factor: 2.431

4.  Visibility of mammographically occult breast cancer on diffusion-weighted MRI versus ultrasound.

Authors:  Nita Amornsiripanitch; Habib Rahbar; Averi E Kitsch; Diana L Lam; Brett Weitzel; Savannah C Partridge
Journal:  Clin Imaging       Date:  2017-10-28       Impact factor: 1.605

5.  Advanced Breast Imaging Availability by Screening Facility Characteristics.

Authors:  Christoph I Lee; Andy Bogart; Rebecca A Hubbard; Eniola T Obadina; Deirdre A Hill; Jennifer S Haas; Anna N A Tosteson; Jennifer A Alford-Teaster; Brian L Sprague; Wendy B DeMartini; Constance D Lehman; Tracy L Onega
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2015-04-04       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Breast Biopsy Intensity and Findings Following Breast Cancer Screening in Women With and Without a Personal History of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Diana S M Buist; Linn Abraham; Christoph I Lee; Janie M Lee; Constance Lehman; Ellen S O'Meara; Natasha K Stout; Louise M Henderson; Deirdre Hill; Karen J Wernli; Jennifer S Haas; Anna N A Tosteson; Karla Kerlikowske; Tracy Onega
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 21.873

7.  Intensive Surveillance with Biannual Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging Downstages Breast Cancer in BRCA1 Mutation Carriers.

Authors:  Rodrigo Santa Cruz Guindalini; Yonglan Zheng; Hiroyuki Abe; Kristen Whitaker; Toshio F Yoshimatsu; Tom Walsh; David Schacht; Kirti Kulkarni; Deepa Sheth; Marion S Verp; Angela R Bradbury; Jane Churpek; Elias Obeid; Jeffrey Mueller; Galina Khramtsova; Fang Liu; Akila Raoul; Hongyuan Cao; Iris L Romero; Susan Hong; Robert Livingston; Nora Jaskowiak; Xiaoming Wang; Marcio Debiasi; Colin C Pritchard; Mary-Claire King; Gregory Karczmar; Gillian M Newstead; Dezheng Huo; Olufunmilayo I Olopade
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 12.531

8.  Utilization of breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging in community practice.

Authors:  Deirdre A Hill; Jennifer S Haas; Robert Wellman; Rebecca A Hubbard; Christoph I Lee; Jennifer Alford-Teaster; Karen J Wernli; Louise M Henderson; Natasha K Stout; Anna N A Tosteson; Karla Kerlikowske; Tracy Onega
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2017-12-06       Impact factor: 5.128

9.  Direct Regularization From Co-Registered Contrast MRI Improves Image Quality of MRI-Guided Near-Infrared Spectral Tomography of Breast Lesions.

Authors:  Limin Zhang; Shudong Jiang; Yan Zhao; Jinchao Feng; Brian W Pogue; Keith D Paulsen
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  Frequency and Clinical Significance of Extramammary Findings on Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Sneha Phadke; Alexandra Thomas; Limin Yang; Catherine Moore; Chang Xia; Mary C Schroeder
Journal:  Clin Breast Cancer       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 3.225

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.