Scott D Ramsey1, N Lynn Henry2, Julie R Gralow2, Dana K Mirick2, William Barlow2, Ruth Etzioni2, David Mummy2, Rahber Thariani2, David L Veenstra2. 1. Scott D. Ramsey, Julie R. Gralow, Dana K. Mirick, William Barlow, Ruth Etzioni, and David Mummy, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Scott D. Ramsey, Julie R. Gralow, Rahber Thariani, and David L. Veenstra, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; and N. Lynn Henry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. sramsey@fhcrc.org. 2. Scott D. Ramsey, Julie R. Gralow, Dana K. Mirick, William Barlow, Ruth Etzioni, and David Mummy, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Scott D. Ramsey, Julie R. Gralow, Rahber Thariani, and David L. Veenstra, University of Washington, Seattle, WA; and N. Lynn Henry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines discourage the use of tumor marker assessment for routine surveillance in nonmetastatic breast cancer, their use in practice is uncertain. Our objective was to determine use of tumor marker tests such as carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3/CA 27.29 and associated Medicare costs in early-stage breast cancer survivors. METHODS: By using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare records for patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer between 2001 and 2007, tumor marker usage within 2 years after diagnosis was identified by billing codes. Logistic regression models were used to identify clinical and demographic factors associated with use of tumor markers. To determine impact on costs of care, we used multivariable regression, controlling for other factors known to influence total medical costs. RESULTS: We identified 39,650 eligible patients. Of these, 16,653 (42%) received at least one tumor marker assessment, averaging 5.7 tests over 2 years, with rates of use per person increasing over time. Factors significantly associated with use included age at diagnosis, diagnosis year, stage at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and urban/rural status. Rates of advanced imaging, but not biopsies, were significantly higher in the assessment group. Medical costs for patients who received at least one test were approximately 29% greater than costs for those who did not, adjusting for other factors. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer tumor markers are frequently used among women with early-stage disease and are associated with an increase in both diagnostic procedures and total cost of care. A better understanding of factors driving the use of and the potential benefits and harms of surveillance-based tumor marker testing is needed.
PURPOSE: Although American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines discourage the use of tumor marker assessment for routine surveillance in nonmetastatic breast cancer, their use in practice is uncertain. Our objective was to determine use of tumor marker tests such as carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3/CA 27.29 and associated Medicare costs in early-stage breast cancer survivors. METHODS: By using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare records for patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer between 2001 and 2007, tumor marker usage within 2 years after diagnosis was identified by billing codes. Logistic regression models were used to identify clinical and demographic factors associated with use of tumor markers. To determine impact on costs of care, we used multivariable regression, controlling for other factors known to influence total medical costs. RESULTS: We identified 39,650 eligible patients. Of these, 16,653 (42%) received at least one tumor marker assessment, averaging 5.7 tests over 2 years, with rates of use per person increasing over time. Factors significantly associated with use included age at diagnosis, diagnosis year, stage at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and urban/rural status. Rates of advanced imaging, but not biopsies, were significantly higher in the assessment group. Medical costs for patients who received at least one test were approximately 29% greater than costs for those who did not, adjusting for other factors. CONCLUSION:Breast cancertumor markers are frequently used among women with early-stage disease and are associated with an increase in both diagnostic procedures and total cost of care. A better understanding of factors driving the use of and the potential benefits and harms of surveillance-based tumor marker testing is needed.
Authors: Martee L Hensley; Jeannette Dowell; James E Herndon; Eric Winer; Nancy Stark; Jane C Weeks; Electra Paskett Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: R C Bast; P Ravdin; D F Hayes; S Bates; H Fritsche; J M Jessup; N Kemeny; G Y Locker; R G Mennel; M R Somerfield Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-03-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ruben G W Quek; Viraj A Master; Kevin C Ward; Chun Chieh Lin; Katherine S Virgo; Kenneth M Portier; Joseph Lipscomb Journal: Cancer Date: 2013-07-31 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Melissa K Accordino; Jason D Wright; Sowmya Vasan; Alfred I Neugut; Grace C Hillyer; Jim C Hu; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-05-09 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Shrujal S Baxi; Minal Kale; Salomeh Keyhani; Benjamin R Roman; Annie Yang; Antonio P Derosa; Deborah Korenstein Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Melissa K Accordino; Jason D Wright; Sowmya Vasan; Alfred I Neugut; Tal Gross; Grace C Hillyer; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Elizabeth M Jaffee; Chi Van Dang; David B Agus; Brian M Alexander; Kenneth C Anderson; Alan Ashworth; Anna D Barker; Roshan Bastani; Sangeeta Bhatia; Jeffrey A Bluestone; Otis Brawley; Atul J Butte; Daniel G Coit; Nancy E Davidson; Mark Davis; Ronald A DePinho; Robert B Diasio; Giulio Draetta; A Lindsay Frazier; Andrew Futreal; Sam S Gambhir; Patricia A Ganz; Levi Garraway; Stanton Gerson; Sumit Gupta; James Heath; Ruth I Hoffman; Cliff Hudis; Chanita Hughes-Halbert; Ramy Ibrahim; Hossein Jadvar; Brian Kavanagh; Rick Kittles; Quynh-Thu Le; Scott M Lippman; David Mankoff; Elaine R Mardis; Deborah K Mayer; Kelly McMasters; Neal J Meropol; Beverly Mitchell; Peter Naredi; Dean Ornish; Timothy M Pawlik; Jeffrey Peppercorn; Martin G Pomper; Derek Raghavan; Christine Ritchie; Sally W Schwarz; Richard Sullivan; Richard Wahl; Jedd D Wolchok; Sandra L Wong; Alfred Yung Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Melissa K Accordino; Jason D Wright; Sowmya Vasan; Alfred I Neugut; Ana Tergas; Jim C Hu; Dawn L Hershman; Melissa K Accordino; Jason D Wright; Sowmya Vasan; Alfred I Neugut; Ana Tergas; Jim C Hu; Dawn L Hershman Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Lindsey Enewold; Helen Parsons; Lirong Zhao; David Bott; Donna R Rivera; Michael J Barrett; Beth A Virnig; Joan L Warren Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr Date: 2020-05-01