Angel Arnaout1, Christina Catley2, Christopher M Booth3, Matthew McInnes4, Ian Graham5, Vikaash Kumar6, Demetrios Simos7, Carl Van Walraven2, Mark Clemons8. 1. Division of General Surgery, Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada2Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 2. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 3. Division of Cancer Care and Epidemiology, Queens University Cancer Research Institute, Kingston, Ontario, Canada4Department of Oncology, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 4. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada5Department of Radiology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 5. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada6School of Epidemiology, Public Health and Preventive Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Oncology, Queens University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. 7. Department of Medical Oncology, Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 8. Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada7Department of Medical Oncology, Ottawa Hospital Cancer Center, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
IMPORTANCE: Contrary to practice guidelines, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is commonly used in the preoperative evaluation of women with breast cancer. While existing literature has found little benefit to MRI in most patients, potential downstream consequences associated with breast MRI are not well described. OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of preoperative breast MRI utilization in a health care system with universal insurance and its association with downstream investigations and clinical outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative heath care databases in Ontario, Canada (2012 population, 13.5 million) over 14 geographic regions were evaluated within the data set. Participants comprised 53 015 patients with primary operable breast cancer treated from 2003 to 2012. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Use of preoperative breast MRI by year, geographic region, and breast cancer stage. Postdiagnosis imaging, biopsy, and short-term surgical outcomes were also evaluated between those who did and did not receive MRI. RESULTS: Overall, 14.8% of patients (7824 of 53 015) had a preoperative MRI. During the 10-year study period, MRI use increased across all stages by 8-fold (from 3% to 24%; P < .001 for trend). Factors associated with MRI use were younger age, higher socioeconomic status, higher Charlson comorbidity score, surgery performed in a teaching hospital, and fewer years of surgeon experience. Multivariate analyses showed that preoperative breast MRI was associated with higher likelihood of the following: postdiagnosis breast imaging (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% CI, 1.92-2.28), postdiagnosis breast biopsies (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.57-1.93), postdiagnosis imaging to assess for distant metastatic disease (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.42-1.61), mastectomy (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.62-1.85), contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.23-1.77), and a greater than 30-day wait to surgery (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 2.36-2.70) (all ORs are adjusted). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Preoperative breast MRI use has increased substantially in routine clinical practice and is associated with a significant increase in ancillary investigations, wait time to surgery, mastectomies, and contralateral prophylactic mastectomies.
IMPORTANCE: Contrary to practice guidelines, breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is commonly used in the preoperative evaluation of women with breast cancer. While existing literature has found little benefit to MRI in most patients, potential downstream consequences associated with breast MRI are not well described. OBJECTIVE: To describe patterns of preoperative breast MRI utilization in a health care system with universal insurance and its association with downstream investigations and clinical outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a population-based retrospective cohort study using administrative heath care databases in Ontario, Canada (2012 population, 13.5 million) over 14 geographic regions were evaluated within the data set. Participants comprised 53 015 patients with primary operable breast cancer treated from 2003 to 2012. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Use of preoperative breast MRI by year, geographic region, and breast cancer stage. Postdiagnosis imaging, biopsy, and short-term surgical outcomes were also evaluated between those who did and did not receive MRI. RESULTS: Overall, 14.8% of patients (7824 of 53 015) had a preoperative MRI. During the 10-year study period, MRI use increased across all stages by 8-fold (from 3% to 24%; P < .001 for trend). Factors associated with MRI use were younger age, higher socioeconomic status, higher Charlson comorbidity score, surgery performed in a teaching hospital, and fewer years of surgeon experience. Multivariate analyses showed that preoperative breast MRI was associated with higher likelihood of the following: postdiagnosis breast imaging (odds ratio [OR], 2.09; 95% CI, 1.92-2.28), postdiagnosis breast biopsies (OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.57-1.93), postdiagnosis imaging to assess for distant metastatic disease (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.42-1.61), mastectomy (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.62-1.85), contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.23-1.77), and a greater than 30-day wait to surgery (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 2.36-2.70) (all ORs are adjusted). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Preoperative breast MRI use has increased substantially in routine clinical practice and is associated with a significant increase in ancillary investigations, wait time to surgery, mastectomies, and contralateral prophylactic mastectomies.
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
Authors: T Onega; W Zhu; J E Weiss; M Goodrich; A N A Tosteson; W DeMartini; B A Virnig; L M Henderson; D S M Buist; K J Wernli; K Kerlikowske; R A Hubbard Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2018-03-07 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Elissa M Ozanne; Julie E Weiss; Tracy Onega; Wendy DeMartini; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana S M Buist; Louise Henderson; Rebecca A Hubbard; Martha Goodrich; Anna N A Tosteson; Beth A Virnig; Cristina O'Donoghue Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2016-06-12 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Tracy Onega; Julia E Weiss; Diana S M Buist; Anna N A Tosteson; Louise M Henderson; Karla Kerlikowske; Martha E Goodrich; Cristina O'Donoghue; Karen J Wernli; Wendy B DeMartini; Beth A Virnig; Caroline S Bennette; Rebecca A Hubbard Journal: Med Care Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: J M Baena-Cañada; L Rodríguez-Pérez; S Gámez-Casado; A Quílez-Cutillas; C Cortés-Carmona; P Rosado-Varela; S Estalella-Mendoza; P Ramírez-Daffós; J Jaén-Olasolo; E Benítez-Rodríguez Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2018-04-09 Impact factor: 3.405