Does insurance mix impact utilization of published care practices and guidelines among breast imaging sites?

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (30_suppl) ◽  
pp. 150-150
Author(s):  
Anne Marie Murphy ◽  
Christine B. Weldon ◽  
Julia Rachel Trosman ◽  
Julian C. Schink ◽  
David Ansell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Breast Imaging ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Diagnostic Practices ◽  
Care Practices

150 Background: Significant variation exists across Metropolitan Chicago in the quality and timeliness measures for breast cancer detection (Rauscher GH 2014). We examined utilization of published care practices and guidelines at breast imaging sites in Chicago and compared them based on insurance mix. Methods: We conducted an IRB approved web survey of all 58 breast imaging sites in Chicago. Using guidelines (NCCN, NAPBC, ACR) and peer-reviewed literature (38 studies) we developed a survey of breast diagnostic practices. Results analyzed using simple frequencies and Fisher's exact test. Results: We achieved a response rate of 91% (53/58 sites): 27 sites with over 40% privately insured (PI) patients and 26 sites with over 60% Medicare, Medicaid, charity and self pay (MM) patients (IDPH 2012). Utilization of practices vary (Table). The use of breast MRI for diagnostic patients is 81% (17/21) of PI vs. 47% (8/17) of MM sites, p=0.04. Image guided biopsy is used by 81% (17/21) of PI vs. 25% (3/12) of MM sites, p=0.03. Clip placement at biopsy is done at 86% (18/21) of PI vs. 50% (6/12) of MM sites, p=0.04. Conclusions: Sites with higher rates of private insurance show better utilization of three published breast cancer diagnostic care practices. However, improvement is needed across sites, regardless of insurance mix, to provide care to all patients that is up-to-date on published breast cancer screening and diagnostic practices. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Randomized Trial of Surveillance with Abbreviated MRI in Breast Cancer Survivors – Does it impact patient anxiety and cancer detection rate?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean Morag Seely ◽  
Marina Mohallem Fonseca ◽  
Tasmeen Alhassan ◽  
Yashmin Nisha ◽  
Diana Koszycki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Survivors ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Breast Cancer Survivors ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Patient Anxiety ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Academic Center ◽  
Abbreviated Breast Mri

Abstract Purpose: Abbreviated breast MRI substantially reduces the image acquisition and reading times and has been reported to have similar diagnostic accuracy as a full diagnostic protocol but has not been evaluated prospectively with respect to impact on patient anxiety in breast cancer survivors and cancer outcomes.Methods: This prospective controlled trial of parallel design was performed at an academic center on women with a personal history of breast cancer who were randomized into two groups: surveillance with MG or MG plus A-MRI. Primary outcome was anxiety compared between the two and measured by four validated questionnaires at three different time-points during the study. Other parameters including the CDR, abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), and positive predictive value for biopsy (PPV3) were compared between modalities of MG and A-MRI. Tissue diagnoses or 1 year of follow-up were used to establish the reference standard. Linear mixed models were used to analyze anxiety and Fisher’s exact test to compare imaging outcomes.Results: 198 patients were allocated to either MG alone (94) or A-MRI plus MG (104). Anxiety scores in all questionnaires were similarly elevated in both groups (50.99+/-4.6 with MG vs 51.73+/-2.56 with MRI,p>0.05) and did not change over time. MRI detected 5 invasive cancers and 1 DCIS, and MG detected 1 DCIS. MRI had higher incremental CDR(48/1000(5/104) vs MG 5/1000(1/198,p=0.01)) and higher AIR 25%(26/104) vs MG 4.5%(9/198,p<0.00001), with no difference in PPV3:MRI 28.6%(6/21)vs MG 16.7%(1/6,p=0.557).Conclusion:Compared to mammography alone, A-MRI had significantly higher incremental cancer detection in breast cancer survivors. Despite a higher rate of recalls and biopsies, A-MRI had no adverse impact on anxiety.

Diagnostic Breast Imaging and Breast Cancer Staging

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nidhi Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Breast Imaging ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Architectural Distortion ◽  
Diagnostic Modality ◽  
Cancer Breast

This review is geared to provide surgeons practical insight on breast imaging, intended to improve breast cancer detection and staging. Breast cancer is a leading cause of death in women in the United States. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system provides a tumor-node-metastasis classification that helps in determining prognosis and patient treatment. There is an increasing role of radiologists in ascertaining the correct cancer stage. Screening mammography is the basic tool and most widely used modality to detect breast cancer. The diagnostic work-up of a patient recalled from screening is the next step in assessing the artifacts and benign findings from more suspicious lesions. Additional mammographic views, tomosynthesis, and ultrasonography play an important role in determining if the finding represents a true lesion and if so, to localize and determine its level of suspicion to be cancer. Breast MRI is used both as a screening tool and a diagnostic modality to help in cancer detection and treatment planning. Recognizing patterns of benign masses, malignant calcifications, architectural distortion, and masses via a multimodality approach is the essential first step in further diagnosis. A quick overview of common interventional breast procedures may serve as a practical reference for the readers. This review contains 10 figures, 8 tables, and 39 references. Key Words: breast cancer, breast MRI, breast ultrasonography, fibroadenoma, invasive ductal staging, male breast, mammograms, postoperative breast, screening

Diagnostic Breast Imaging and Breast Cancer Staging

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nidhi Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Breast Imaging ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
The United States ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Architectural Distortion ◽  
Diagnostic Modality ◽  
Cancer Breast

This review is geared to provide surgeons practical insight on breast imaging, intended to improve breast cancer detection and staging. Breast cancer is a leading cause of death in women in the United States. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system provides a tumor-node-metastasis classification that helps in determining prognosis and patient treatment. There is an increasing role of radiologists in ascertaining the correct cancer stage. Screening mammography is the basic tool and most widely used modality to detect breast cancer. The diagnostic work-up of a patient recalled from screening is the next step in assessing the artifacts and benign findings from more suspicious lesions. Additional mammographic views, tomosynthesis, and ultrasonography play an important role in determining if the finding represents a true lesion and if so, to localize and determine its level of suspicion to be cancer. Breast MRI is used both as a screening tool and a diagnostic modality to help in cancer detection and treatment planning. Recognizing patterns of benign masses, malignant calcifications, architectural distortion, and masses via a multimodality approach is the essential first step in further diagnosis. A quick overview of common interventional breast procedures may serve as a practical reference for the readers. This review contains 10 figures, 8 tables, and 39 references. Key Words: breast cancer, breast MRI, breast ultrasonography, fibroadenoma, invasive ductal staging, male breast, mammograms, postoperative breast, screening

Imaging Approaches and Findings in the Reconstructed Breast: A Pictorial Essay

2011 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anabel M. Scaranelo ◽  
Bridgette Lord ◽  
Riham Eiada ◽  
Stefan O. Hofer
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Reconstructive Surgery ◽  
Genetic Screening ◽  
Breast Imaging ◽  
Breast Cancer Detection ◽  
Imaging Findings ◽  
Pictorial Essay ◽  
Reconstructed Breast

Advances in breast imaging over the last 15 years have improved early breast cancer detection and management. After treatment for breast cancer, many women choose to have reconstructive surgery. In addition, with the availability of widespread genetic screening for breast cancer, an increasing number of women are choosing prophylactic mastectomies and subsequent breast reconstruction. The purpose of this pictorial essay is to present the spectrum of imaging findings in the reconstructed breast.

Molecular Breast Imaging: A Scientific Review

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katie N Hunt
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Imaging ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
Scientific Review ◽  
Molecular Breast Imaging ◽  
Breast Cancer Staging ◽  
Fast Learning ◽  
Technical Advances ◽  
History Of

Abstract Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is a nuclear medicine technique that has evolved considerably over the past two decades. Technical advances have allowed reductions in administered doses to the point that they are now acceptable for screening. The most common radiotracer used in MBI, 99mTc-sestamibi, has a long history of safe use. Biopsy capability has become available in recent years, with early clinical experience demonstrating technically successful biopsies of MBI-detected lesions. MBI has been shown to be an effective supplemental screening tool in women with dense breasts and is also utilized for breast cancer staging, assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, problem solving, and as an alternative to breast MRI in women who have a contraindication to MRI. The degree of background parenchymal uptake on MBI shows promise as a tool for breast cancer risk stratification. Radiologist interpretation is guided by a validated MBI lexicon that mirrors the BI-RADS lexicon. With short interpretation times, a fast learning curve for radiologists, and a substantially lower cost than breast MRI, MBI provides many benefits in the practices in which it is utilized. This review will discuss the current state of MBI technology, clinical applications of MBI, MBI interpretation, radiation dose associated with MBI, and the future of MBI.

scholarly journals Impact of Pre-Operative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) on Contralateral Synchronous and Metachronous Breast Cancer Detection- A Case Control Comparison Study With Mean Follow-Up of 102 Months.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Pei Wu ◽  
Chih-Yu Chen ◽  
Chih-Wei Lee ◽  
Hwa-Koon Wu ◽  
Shou-Tung Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Contralateral Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Contralateral Breast ◽  
Conventional Imaging ◽  
Metachronous Breast Cancer ◽  
Group B ◽  
Synchronous Breast Cancer

Abstract Background: Women with unilateral breast cancer are at an increased risk for the development of contralateral breast cancers. We hypothesis that combined breast MRI would detect more contralateral synchronous breast cancer than conventional imaging alone, and resulted in less contralateral metachronous breast cancer during follow-up. Methods: In this case control analysis, we retrospectively collected two groups of patients for evaluating the effectiveness and value of adding pre-operative breast MRI to conventional breast images (mammography and sonography) for detection of contralateral synchronous breast cancer. The new metachronous contralateral breast cancer diagnosed during follow-up was prospectively evaluated and compared. Results: Group A (n=733) comprised patients who underwent conventional preoperative imaging and group B (n=735) combined with MRI were enrolled and compared. Seventy (9.5%) of the group B patients were found to have contralateral lesions detected by breast MRI, and 65.7% of these lesions only visible with MRI. The positive predictive value of breast MRI detected contralateral lesions was 48.8%. With the addition of breast MRI to conventional imaging studies, more surgical excisions were performed in contralateral breasts (6% (44/735) versus 1.4% (10/733), P< 0.01), more synchronous contralateral breast cancer detected (2.9% (21/735) versus 1.1% (8/733), P=0.02), and resulted in numerical less (2.2% (16/714) versus 3% (22/725), p=0.3) metachronous contralateral breast cancer during a mean follow-up of 102 months. Conclusions: Combining pre-operative breast MRI evaluation resulted in an increase of contralateral synchronous breast cancer detection, and a numerical less subsequent contralateral metachronous breast cancer occurrence compared to conventional imaging alone.

A PRELIMINARY STUDY OF RISK FACTORS OF BREAST CANCER AND THE USEFULNESS OF BREAST MRI AS AN ADDITION TO MAMMOGRAPHY IN DETECTING BREAST CANCER IN HIGH RISK WOMEN

2016 ◽  
Vol 78 (11-3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Noor Khairiah A. Karim ◽  
Rohayu Hami ◽  
Nur Hashamimi Hashim ◽  
Nizuwan Azman ◽  
Ibrahim Lutfi Shuaib
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cancer Detection ◽  
Significant Risk ◽  
Breast Mri ◽  
Breast Cancer Detection ◽  
P Value ◽  
High Risk Women ◽  
History Of

The risk factors of breast cancer among women, such as genetic, family history and lifestyle factors, can be divided into high-, intermediate- and average-risk. Determining these risk factors may actually help in preventing breast cancer occurrence. Besides that, screening of breast cancer which include mammography, can be done in promoting early breast cancer detection. Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been recommended as a supplemental screening tool in high risk women. The aim of this study was to identify the significant risk factor of breast cancer among women and also to determine the usefulness of breast MRI as an addition to mammography in detection of breast cancer in high risk women. This retrospective cohort study design was conducted using patients’ data taken from those who underwent mammography for screening or diagnostic purposes in Advanced Medical and Dental Institute, Universiti Sains Malaysia, from 2007 until 2015. Data from 289 subjects were successfully retrieved and analysed based on their risk factors of breast cancer. Meanwhile, data from 120 subjects who had high risks and underwent both mammography and breast MRI were further analysed. There were two significant risk factors of breast cancer seen among the study population: family history of breast cancer (p-value=0.012) and previous history of breast or ovarian cancer (p-value <0.001). Breast MRI demonstrated high sensitivity (90%) while mammography demonstrated high specificity (80%) in detection of breast cancer in all 120 subjects. The number of cases of breast cancer detection using breast MRI [46 (38.3%)] was higher compared to mammography [24 (20.0%)]. However, breast MRI was found to be non-significant as an adjunct tool to mammography in detecting breast cancer in high risk women (p-value=0.189). A comprehensive screening guideline and surveillance of women at high risk is indeed useful and should be implemented to increase cancer detection rate at early stage

scholarly journals Underdiagnosis of Hereditary Breast Cancer: Are Genetic Testing Guidelines a Tool or an Obstacle?

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (6) ◽  
pp. 453-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter D. Beitsch ◽  
Pat W. Whitworth ◽  
Kevin Hughes ◽  
Rakesh Patel ◽  
Barry Rosen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Genetic Testing ◽  
Germ Line ◽  
Test Results ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Exact Test ◽  
Nccn Guidelines ◽  
Current Testing ◽  
Panel Testing ◽  
Pathogenic Variants

Purpose An estimated 10% of breast and ovarian cancers result from hereditary causes. Current testing guidelines for germ line susceptibility genes in patients with breast carcinoma were developed to identify carriers of BRCA1/ 2 variants and have evolved in the panel-testing era. We evaluated the capability of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines to identify patients with breast cancer with pathogenic variants in expanded panel testing. Methods An institutional review board–approved multicenter prospective registry was initiated with 20 community and academic sites experienced in cancer genetic testing and counseling. Eligibility criteria included patients with a previously or newly diagnosed breast cancer who had not undergone either single- or multigene testing. Consecutive patients 18 to 90 years of age were consented and underwent an 80-gene panel test. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act–compliant electronic case report forms collected information on patient demographics, diagnoses, phenotypes, and test results. Results More than 1,000 patients were enrolled, and data records for 959 patients were analyzed; 49.95% met NCCN criteria, and 50.05% did not. Overall, 8.65% of patients had a pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant. Of patients who met NCCN guidelines with test results, 9.39% had a P/LP variant. Of patients who did not meet guidelines, 7.9% had a P/LP variant. The difference in positive results between these groups was not statistically significant (Fisher’s exact test P = .4241). Conclusion Our results indicate that nearly half of patients with breast cancer with a P/LP variant with clinically actionable and/or management guidelines in development are missed by current testing guidelines. We recommend that all patients with a diagnosis of breast cancer undergo expanded panel testing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document