Literature DB >> 29139055

Downstream Breast Imaging Following Screening Mammography in Medicare Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Population-Based Study.

Gelareh Sadigh1, Richard Duszak2, Kevin C Ward3, Renjian Jiang3, Jeffrey M Switchenko4, Kimberly E Applegate5, Ruth C Carlos6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Screening tests are generally not recommended in patients with advanced cancer and limited life expectancy. Nonetheless, screening mammography still occurs and may lead to follow-up testing.
OBJECTIVE: We assessed the frequency of downstream breast imaging following screening mammography in patients with advanced colorectal or lung cancer.
DESIGN: Population-based study. PARTICIPANTS: The study included continuously enrolled female fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries ≥65 years of age with advanced colorectal (stage IV) or lung (stage IIIB-IV) cancer reported to a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry between 2000 and 2011. MAIN MEASURES: We assessed the utilization of diagnostic mammography, breast ultrasound, and breast MRI following screening mammography. Logistic regression models were used to explore independent predictors of utilization of downstream tests while controlling for cancer type and patient sociodemographic and regional characteristics. KEY
RESULTS: Among 34,127 women with advanced cancer (23% colorectal; 77% lung cancer; mean age at diagnosis 75 years), 9% (n = 3159) underwent a total of 5750 screening mammograms. Of these, 11% (n = 639) resulted in at least one subsequent diagnostic breast imaging examination within 9 months. Diagnostic mammography was most common (9%; n = 532), followed by ultrasound (6%; n = 334) and MRI (0.2%; n = 14). Diagnostic mammography rates were higher in whites than African Americans (OR, 1.6; p <0.05). Higher ultrasound utilization was associated with more favorable economic status (OR, 1.8; p <0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Among women with advanced colorectal and lung cancer, 9% continued screening mammography, and 11% of these screening studies led to at least one additional downstream test, resulting in costs with little likelihood of meaningful benefit.

Entities:  

Keywords:  advanced cancer; breast imaging; cancer survivorship; downstream tests

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29139055      PMCID: PMC5834957          DOI: 10.1007/s11606-017-4212-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  21 in total

1.  Overview of the SEER-Medicare data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States elderly population.

Authors:  Joan L Warren; Carrie N Klabunde; Deborah Schrag; Peter B Bach; Gerald F Riley
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.983

Review 2.  Disparities in screening mammography. Current status, interventions and implications.

Authors:  Monica E Peek; Jini H Han
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 5.128

3.  Efficacy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis.

Authors:  K Kerlikowske; D Grady; S M Rubin; C Sandrock; V L Ernster
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-01-11       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Quality determinants of mammography: guideline overview. Agency for Health Care Policy and research.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 1.798

5.  Association between the Medicare hospice benefit and health care utilization and costs for patients with poor-prognosis cancer.

Authors:  Ziad Obermeyer; Maggie Makar; Samer Abujaber; Francesca Dominici; Susan Block; David M Cutler
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 56.272

6.  Psychological and behavioral implications of abnormal mammograms.

Authors:  C Lerman; B Trock; B K Rimer; A Boyce; C Jepson; P F Engstrom
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making.

Authors:  L C Walter; K E Covinsky
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-06       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Measuring low-value care in Medicare.

Authors:  Aaron L Schwartz; Bruce E Landon; Adam G Elshaug; Michael E Chernew; J Michael McWilliams
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 21.873

9.  Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Distinguishing screening from diagnostic mammograms using Medicare claims data.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Weiwei Zhu; Steven Balch; Rebecca Smith-Bindman; Paul Fishman; Rebecca A Hubbard
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  2 in total

1.  Overutilization of Breast Cancer Screening in the US: Awareness of a Growing Problem.

Authors:  Mara A Schonberg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  2019 Update on Medical Overuse: A Review.

Authors:  Daniel J Morgan; Sanket S Dhruva; Eric R Coon; Scott M Wright; Deborah Korenstein
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 21.873

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.