E Graham Englert1,2, Guillermo Ares1,3, Andrea Henricks2, Karen Rychlik1, Catherine J Hunter4,5. 1. Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, 225 E Chicago Avenue, Box 63, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. 2. Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 310 East Superior Street, Morton 4-685, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, University of Illinois at Chicago, 840 South Wood Street, Suite 376-CSN, Chicago, IL, 60612, USA. 4. Ann and Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago, 225 E Chicago Avenue, Box 63, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. chunter@luriechildrens.org. 5. Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, 310 East Superior Street, Morton 4-685, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. chunter@luriechildrens.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Finding a breast mass in a child provokes apprehension in parents, especially in those with a family history of breast cancer. Clinicians must decide between serial imaging or biopsy of the mass. Herein, we identify management differences in those with and without a positive family history, as well as identify cost differences. METHODS: An institutional retrospective review was performed of patients (2-18 years of age) with a diagnosis of breast mass. Patient demographics, presentation, medical and surgical history, physical exam, imaging, and pathologic diagnosis were collected. Cost data were acquired from the pediatric health information system (PHIS). Costs were compared between patients managed by biopsy versus serial ultrasounds. Bivariate analyses including Pearson's Chi-square, student's t tests, and logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: The probability of biopsy increases with age (p = 0.0001) and female gender (p = 0.006). Biopsy rate is higher for larger masses (p < 0.0001), growing size (p < 0.0001), and in patients with a positive family history of breast cancer (p < 0.0001). The average cost of care for management with initial excisional biopsy was $4491 versus those with serial ultrasounds ($986) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with small lesions, even with a family history of breast cancer, non-operative monitoring is a safe and cost-effective alternative to invasive biopsy.
PURPOSE: Finding a breast mass in a child provokes apprehension in parents, especially in those with a family history of breast cancer. Clinicians must decide between serial imaging or biopsy of the mass. Herein, we identify management differences in those with and without a positive family history, as well as identify cost differences. METHODS: An institutional retrospective review was performed of patients (2-18 years of age) with a diagnosis of breast mass. Patient demographics, presentation, medical and surgical history, physical exam, imaging, and pathologic diagnosis were collected. Cost data were acquired from the pediatric health information system (PHIS). Costs were compared between patients managed by biopsy versus serial ultrasounds. Bivariate analyses including Pearson's Chi-square, student's t tests, and logistic regression were performed. RESULTS: The probability of biopsy increases with age (p = 0.0001) and female gender (p = 0.006). Biopsy rate is higher for larger masses (p < 0.0001), growing size (p < 0.0001), and in patients with a positive family history of breast cancer (p < 0.0001). The average cost of care for management with initial excisional biopsy was $4491 versus those with serial ultrasounds ($986) (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with small lesions, even with a family history of breast cancer, non-operative monitoring is a safe and cost-effective alternative to invasive biopsy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Breast mass; Cost; Pediatric; Ultrasound
Authors: Yiming Gao; Mansi A Saksena; Elena F Brachtel; Deborah C terMeulen; Elizabeth A Rafferty Journal: Eur J Radiol Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 3.528
Authors: Hernan I Vargas; M Perla Vargas; Kamal Eldrageely; Katherine D Gonzalez; Melissa L Burla; Rose Venegas; Iraj Khalkhali Journal: Am Surg Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Sebastian Harth; Christopher Behrens; Fritz Christian Roller; Gerhard Ferdinand Peter Alzen; Gabriele Anja Krombach Journal: Ultraschall Med Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 6.548