IMPORTANCE: A breast pathology diagnosis provides the basis for clinical treatment and management decisions; however, its accuracy is inadequately understood. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the magnitude of ...diagnostic disagreement among pathologists compared with a consensus panel reference diagnosis and to evaluate associated patient and pathologist characteristics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Study of pathologists who interpret breast biopsies in clinical practices in 8 US states. EXPOSURES: Participants independently interpreted slides between November 2011 and May 2014 from test sets of 60 breast biopsies (240 total cases, 1 slide per case), including 23 cases of invasive breast cancer, 73 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 72 with atypical hyperplasia (atypia), and 72 benign cases without atypia. Participants were blinded to the interpretations of other study pathologists and consensus panel members. Among the 3 consensus panel members, unanimous agreement of their independent diagnoses was 75%, and concordance with the consensus-derived reference diagnoses was 90.3%. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The proportions of diagnoses overinterpreted and underinterpreted relative to the consensus-derived reference diagnoses were assessed. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of invited, responding pathologists were eligible and consented to participate. Of these, 91% (N = 115) completed the study, providing 6900 individual case diagnoses. Compared with the consensus-derived reference diagnosis, the overall concordance rate of diagnostic interpretations of participating pathologists was 75.3% (95% CI, 73.4%-77.0%; 5194 of 6900 interpretations). Among invasive carcinoma cases (663 interpretations), 96% (95% CI, 94%-97%) were concordant, and 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%) were underinterpreted; among DCIS cases (2097 interpretations), 84% (95% CI, 82%-86%) were concordant, 3% (95% CI, 2%-4%) were overinterpreted, and 13% (95% CI, 12%-15%) were underinterpreted; among atypia cases (2070 interpretations), 48% (95% CI, 44%-52%) were concordant, 17% (95% CI, 15%-21%) were overinterpreted, and 35% (95% CI, 31%-39%) were underinterpreted; and among benign cases without atypia (2070 interpretations), 87% (95% CI, 85%-89%) were concordant and 13% (95% CI, 11%-15%) were overinterpreted. Disagreement with the reference diagnosis was statistically significantly higher among biopsies from women with higher (n = 122) vs lower (n = 118) breast density on prior mammograms (overall concordance rate, 73% 95% CI, 71%-75% for higher vs 77% 95% CI, 75%-80% for lower, P < .001), and among pathologists who interpreted lower weekly case volumes (P < .001) or worked in smaller practices (P = .034) or nonacademic settings (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this study of pathologists, in which diagnostic interpretation was based on a single breast biopsy slide, overall agreement between the individual pathologists’ interpretations and the expert consensus–derived reference diagnoses was 75.3%, with the highest level of concordance for invasive carcinoma and lower levels of concordance for DCIS and atypia. Further research is needed to understand the relationship of these findings with patient management.
Background: Risk prediction models for breast cancer can be improved by the addition of recently identified risk factors, including breast density and use of hormone therapy. We used prospective risk ...information to predict a diagnosis of breast cancer in a cohort of 1 million women undergoing screening mammography. Methods: There were 2 392 998 eligible screening mammograms from women without previously diagnosed breast cancer who had had a prior mammogram in the preceding 5 years. Within 1 year of the screening mammogram, 11 638 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Separate logistic regression risk models were constructed for premenopausal and postmenopausal examinations by use of a stringent (P<.0001) criterion for the inclusion of risk factors. Risk models were constructed with 75% of the data and validated with the remaining 25%. Concordance of the predicted with the observed outcomes was assessed by a concordance (c) statistic after logistic regression model fit. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Statistically significant risk factors for breast cancer diagnosis among premenopausal women included age, breast density, family history of breast cancer, and a prior breast procedure. For postmenopausal women, the statistically significant factors included age, breast density, race, ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, a prior breast procedure, body mass index, natural menopause, hormone therapy, and a prior false-positive mammogram. The model may identify high-risk women better than the Gail model, although predictive accuracy was only moderate. The c statistics were 0.631 (95% confidence interval CI = 0.618 to 0.644) for premenopausal women and 0.624 (95% CI = 0.619 to 0.630) for postmenopausal women. Conclusion: Breast density is a strong additional risk factor for breast cancer, although it is unknown whether reduction in breast density would reduce risk. Our risk model may be able to identify women at high risk for breast cancer for preventive interventions or more intensive surveillance.
Few studies have examined the comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in U.S. community practice.
To determine whether the interpretive performance of digital and ...film-screen mammography differs.
Prospective cohort study.
Mammography facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.
329,261 women aged 40 to 79 years underwent 869 286 mammograms (231 034 digital; 638 252 film-screen).
Invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed within 12 months of a digital or film-screen examination and calculation of mammography sensitivity, specificity, cancer detection rates, and tumor outcomes.
Overall, cancer detection rates and tumor characteristics were similar for digital and film-screen mammography, but the sensitivity and specificity of each modality varied by age, tumor characteristics, breast density, and menopausal status. Compared with film-screen mammography, the sensitivity of digital mammography was significantly higher for women aged 60 to 69 years (89.9% vs. 83.0%; P = 0.014) and those with estrogen receptor-negative cancer (78.5% vs. 65.8%; P = 0.016); borderline significantly higher for women aged 40 to 49 years (82.4% vs. 75.6%; P = 0.071), those with extremely dense breasts (83.6% vs. 68.1%; P = 0.051), and pre- or perimenopausal women (87.1% vs. 81.7%; P = 0.057); and borderline significantly lower for women aged 50 to 59 years (80.5% vs. 85.1%; P = 0.097). The specificity of digital and film-screen mammography was similar by decade of age, except for women aged 40 to 49 years (88.0% vs. 89.7%; P < 0.001).
Statistical power for subgroup analyses was limited.
Overall, cancer detection with digital or film-screen mammography is similar in U.S. women aged 50 to 79 years undergoing screening mammography. Women aged 40 to 49 years are more likely to have extremely dense breasts and estrogen receptor-negative tumors; if they are offered mammography screening, they may choose to undergo digital mammography to optimize cancer detection.
National Cancer Institute.
IMPORTANCE Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used for breast cancer screening, diagnostic evaluation, and surveillance. However, we lack data on national patterns of breast MRI ...use in community practice. OBJECTIVE To describe patterns of breast MRI use in US community practice during the period 2005 through 2009. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Observational cohort study using data collected from 2005 through 2009 on breast MRI and mammography from 5 national Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries. Data included 8931 breast MRI examinations and 1 288 924 screening mammograms from women aged 18 to 79 years. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES We calculated the rate of breast MRI examinations per 1000 women with breast imaging within the same year and described the clinical indications for the breast MRI examinations by year and age. We compared women screened with breast MRI to women screened with mammography alone for patient characteristics and lifetime breast cancer risk. RESULTS The overall rate of breast MRI from 2005 through 2009 nearly tripled from 4.2 to 11.5 examinations per 1000 women, with the most rapid increase from 2005 to 2007 (P = .02). The most common clinical indication was diagnostic evaluation (40.3%), followed by screening (31.7%). Compared with women who received screening mammography alone, women who underwent screening breast MRI were more likely to be younger than 50 years, white non-Hispanic, and nulliparous and to have a personal history of breast cancer, a family history of breast cancer, and extremely dense breast tissue (all P < .001). The proportion of women screened using breast MRI at high lifetime risk for breast cancer (>20%) increased during the study period from 9% in 2005 to 29% in 2009. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Use of breast MRI for screening in high-risk women is increasing. However, our findings suggest that there is a need to improve appropriate use, including among women who may benefit from screening breast MRI.
To retrospectively evaluate the range of performance outcomes of the radiologist in an audit of screening mammography by using a representative sample of U.S. radiologists to allow development of ...performance benchmarks for screening mammography.
Institutional review board approval was obtained, and study was HIPAA compliant. Informed consent was or was not obtained according to institutional review board guidelines. Data from 188 mammographic facilities and 807 radiologists obtained between 1996 and 2002 were analyzed from six registries from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). Contributed data included demographic information, clinical findings, mammographic interpretation, and biopsy results. Measurements calculated were positive predictive values (PPVs) from screening mammography (PPV(1)), biopsy recommendation (PPV(2)), biopsy performed (PPV(3)), recall rate, cancer detection rate, mean cancer size, and cancer stage. Radiologist performance data are presented as 50th (median), 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles and as graphic presentations by using smoothed curves.
There were 2 580 151 screening mammographic studies from 1 117 390 women (age range, <30 to >/=80 years). The respective means and ranges of performance outcomes for the middle 50% of radiologists were as follows: recall rate, 9.8% and 6.4%-13.3%; PPV(1), 4.8% and 3.4%-6.2%; and PPV(2), 24.6% and 18.8%-32.0%. Mean cancer detection rate was 4.7 per 1000, and the median corrected mean size of invasive cancers was 13 mm. The range of performance outcomes for the middle 80% of radiologists also was presented.
Community screening mammographic performance measurements of cancer outcomes for the majority of radiologists in the BCSC surpass performance recommendations. Recall rate for almost half of radiologists, however, is higher than the recommended rate.
The relationships among breast density, age, and use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) in breast cancer detection have not been fully evaluated.
To determine how breast density, age, and use of ...HRT individually and in combination affect the accuracy of screening mammography.
Prospective cohort study.
7 population-based mammography registries in North Carolina; New Mexico; New Hampshire; Vermont; Colorado; Seattle, Washington; and San Francisco, California.
329 495 women 40 to 89 years of age who had 463 372 screening mammograms from 1996 to 1998; 2223 women received a diagnosis of breast cancer.
Breast density, age, HRT use, rate of breast cancer occurrence, and sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography.
Adjusted sensitivity ranged from 62.9% in women with extremely dense breasts to 87.0% in women with almost entirely fatty breasts; adjusted sensitivity increased with age from 68.6% in women 40 to 44 years of age to 83.3% in women 80 to 89 years of age. Adjusted specificity increased from 89.1% in women with extremely dense breasts to 96.9% in women with almost entirely fatty breasts. In women who did not use HRT, adjusted specificity increased from 91.4% in women 40 to 44 years of age to 94.4% in women 80 to 89 years of age. In women who used HRT, adjusted specificity was about 91.7% for all ages.
Mammographic breast density and age are important predictors of the accuracy of screening mammography. Although HRT use is not an independent predictor of accuracy, it probably affects accuracy by increasing breast density.
To evaluate the process of survivorship care plan (SCP) completion and to survey oncology staff and primary care physicians (PCPs) regarding challenges of implementing SCPs.
Descriptive pilot study.
...Two facilities in Vermont, an urban academic medical center and a rural community academic cancer center.
17 oncology clinical staff created SCPs, 39 PCPs completed surveys, and 58 patients (breast or colorectal cancer) participated in a telephone survey.
Using Journey Forward tools, SCPs were created and presented to patients. PCPs received the SCP with a survey assessing its usefulness and barriers to delivery. Oncology staff were interviewed to assess perceived challenges and benefits of SCPs. Qualitative and quantitative data were used to identify challenges to the development and implementation process as well as patient perceptions of the SCP visit.
SCP, healthcare provider perception of barriers to completion and implementation, and patient perception of SCP visit.
Oncology staff cited the time required to obtain information for SCPs as a challenge. Completing SCPs 3-6 months after treatment ended was optimal. All participants felt advanced practice professionals should complete and review SCPs with patients. The most common challenge for PCPs to implement SCP recommendations was insufficient knowledge of cancer survivor issues. Most patients found the care plan visit very useful, particularly within six months of diagnosis.
Creation time may be a barrier to widespread SCP implementation. Cancer survivors find SCPs useful, but PCPs feel insufficient knowledge of cancer survivor issues is a barrier to providing best follow-up care. Incorporating SCPs in electronic medical records may facilitate patient identification, appropriate staff scheduling, and timely SCP creation.
Oncology nurse practitioners are well positioned to create and deliver SCPs, transitioning patients from oncology care to a PCP in a shared-care model of optimal wellness. Institution support for the time needed for SCP creation and review is imperative for sustaining this initiative.
Accessing complete medical records is an obstacle for completing SCPs. A 3-6 month window to develop and deliver SCPs may be ideal. PCPs perceive insufficient knowledge of cancer survivor issues as a barrier to providing appropriate follow-up care.
Full text
Available for:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, OILJ, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK, VSZLJ
Background
Computer-aided detection (CAD) is applied during screening mammography for millions of US women annually, although it is uncertain whether CAD improves breast cancer detection when used by ...community radiologists.
Methods
We investigated the association between CAD use during film-screen screening mammography and specificity, sensitivity, positive predictive value, cancer detection rates, and prognostic characteristics of breast cancers (stage, size, and node involvement). Records from 684 956 women who received more than 1.6 million film-screen mammograms at Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium facilities in seven states in the United States from 1998 to 2006 were analyzed. We used random-effects logistic regression to estimate associations between CAD and specificity (true-negative examinations among women without breast cancer), sensitivity (true-positive examinations among women with breast cancer diagnosed within 1 year of mammography), and positive predictive value (breast cancer diagnosed after positive mammograms) while adjusting for mammography registry, patient age, time since previous mammography, breast density, use of hormone replacement therapy, and year of examination (1998-2002 vs 2003-2006). All statistical tests were two-sided.
Results
Of 90 total facilities, 25 (27.8%) adopted CAD and used it for an average of 27.5 study months. In adjusted analyses, CAD use was associated with statistically significantly lower specificity (OR = 0.87, 95% confidence interval CI = 0.85 to 0.89, P < .001) and positive predictive value (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.80 to 0.99, P = .03). A non-statistically significant increase in overall sensitivity with CAD (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.33, P = .62) was attributed to increased sensitivity for ductal carcinoma in situ (OR = 1.55, 95% CI = 0.83 to 2.91; P = .17), although sensitivity for invasive cancer was similar with or without CAD (OR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.75 to 1.24; P = .77). CAD was not associated with higher breast cancer detection rates or more favorable stage, size, or lymph node status of invasive breast cancer.
Conclusion
CAD use during film-screen screening mammography in the United States is associated with decreased specificity but not with improvement in the detection rate or prognostic characteristics of invasive breast cancer.
Introduction Timely follow-up of abnormal tests is critical to the effectiveness of cancer screening, but may vary by screening test, healthcare system, and sociodemographic group. Methods Timely ...follow-up of abnormal mammogram and fecal occult blood testing or fecal immunochemical tests (FOBT/FIT) were compared by race/ethnicity using Population-Based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium data. Participants were women with an abnormal mammogram (aged 40–75 years) or FOBT/FIT (aged 50–75 years) in 2010–2012. Analyses were performed in 2015. Timely follow-up was defined as colonoscopy ≤3 months following positive FOBT/FIT; additional imaging or biopsy ≤3 months following Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System Category 0, 4, or 5 mammograms; or ≤9 months following Category 3 mammograms. Logistic regression was used to model receipt of timely follow-up adjusting for study site, age, year, insurance, and income. Results Among 166,602 mammograms, 10.7% were abnormal; among 566,781 FOBT/FITs, 4.3% were abnormal. Nearly 96% of patients with abnormal mammograms received timely follow-up versus 68% with abnormal FOBT/FIT. There was greater variability in receipt of follow-up across healthcare systems for positive FOBT/FIT than for abnormal mammograms. For mammography, black women were less likely than whites to receive timely follow-up (91.8% vs 96.0%, OR=0.71, 95% CI=0.51, 0.97). For FOBT/FIT, Hispanics were more likely than whites to receive timely follow-up than whites (70.0% vs 67.6%, OR=1.12, 95% CI=1.04, 1.21). Conclusions Timely follow-up among women was more likely for abnormal mammograms than FOBT/FITs, with small variations in follow-up rates by race/ethnicity and larger variation across healthcare systems.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NLZOH, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UILJ, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK, ZAGLJ, ZRSKP
Background: Self-reported screening behaviors from national surveys often overestimate screening use, and the amount of overestimation
may vary by demographic characteristics. We examine self-report ...bias in mammography screening rates overall, by age, and by
race/ethnicity.
Methods: We use mammography registry data (1999-2000) from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium to estimate the validity
of self-reported mammography screening collected by two national surveys. First, we compare mammography use from 1999 to 2000
for a geographically defined population (Vermont) with self-reported rates in the prior two years from the 2000 Vermont Behavioral
Risk Factor Surveillance System. We then use a screening dissemination simulation model to assess estimates of mammography
screening from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey.
Results: Self-report estimates of mammography use in the prior 2 years from the Vermont Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance
System are 15 to 25 percentage points higher than actual screening rates across age groups. The differences in National Health
Interview Survey screening estimates from models are similar for women 40 to 49 and 50 to 59 years and greater than for those
60 to 69, or 70 to 79 (27 and 26 percentage points versus 14, and 14, respectively). Overreporting is highest among African
American women (24.4 percentage points) and lowest among Hispanic women (17.9) with non-Hispanic White women in between (19.3).
Values of sensitivity and specificity consistent with our results are similar to previous validation studies of mammography.
Conclusion: Overestimation of self-reported mammography usage from national surveys varies by age and race/ethnicity. A more
nuanced approach that accounts for demographic differences is needed when adjusting for overestimation or assessing disparities
between populations. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(6):1699–705)
PDF
