Use of imaging and biomarker tests for posttreatment care of early-stage breast cancer survivors

Transitions Within and Use of Outpatient Primary and Oncology Care in Survivors of Adolescent and Young Adult-Onset Cancers

PURPOSE

Survivors of adolescent and young adult (AYA)-onset cancers require comprehensive cancer surveillance care. Guidelines recommend 1-4 clinician visits annually for 5 years depending on stage and disease. The goal of this study was to identify factors associated with patterns of post-treatment primary and oncology care in a large cohort of survivors of AYA-onset cancers diagnosed within an integrated health care system.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with cancer between 2006 and 2020 age 15-39 years were included. Surveillance visits were identified from electronic medical records 2-5 years after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess associations with zero oncology specialty visits.

RESULTS

Of 7,925 survivors, 46% were Hispanic, 6% non-Hispanic Black, 11% non-Hispanic Asian, 35% non-Hispanic White, and 65% female. One-quarter had no oncology specialty visits in the first surveillance year rising to 38% in year 5; 31% had 3+ visits in the first year, declining to 13% in year 5. Over the surveillance period, 17% did not have any oncology specialty visits and 6% had no primary care or oncology visits. Those who were male (odds ratio [OR], 1.21 [95% CI, 1.02 to 1.45]), 20-24 years at diagnosis (OR, 1.58, 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.9; v 35 to 39), or non-Hispanic Black (OR, 1.38, 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.82; v non-Hispanic White) or had high-deductible commercial or Medicaid insurance (OR, 1.35, 95% CI, 1.15 to 1.59; OR, 1.42, 95% CI, 1.11 to 1.82, respectively; v no or low deductible commercial) were more likely to be in the 0-visit group for oncology specialty care.

CONCLUSION

Although the majority of this cohort received either primary or oncology specialty care, our study identifies those who may need tailored outreach for follow-up care. Continued research into development and testing of interventions to improve uptake of appropriate health care for survivors of AYA-onset cancers is critical.

Quality-Adjusted Survival in Patients with Recurrence of Breast Cancer Diagnosed by Asymptomatic or Symptomatic Opportunities

After radical surgery for breast cancer, screening to diagnose recurrence in asymptomatic patients is not recommended. We retrospectively evaluated quality-adjusted survival. Included were fifty-seven recurrent breast cancer patients who died. Survival was partitioned into 3 health states by two different definitions: definition a) time with toxicities due to chemotherapy before progression (TOX1), time from the diagnosis of recurrence to progression without toxicities (TWiST1), and time from progression to death (REL1); definition b) time from the diagnosis of recurrence to death with toxicities (TOX2), without toxicities or hospitalization (TWiST2), and with hospitalization (REL2). Q-TWiST was calculated by multiplying the time in each health state by its utility (uTOX, uTWiST, and uREL). In threshold analyses, uTOX and uREL ranged from 0.0 to 1.0 whereas uTWiST was maintained at 1.0. We compared the patients with (n=32) and without (n=25) symptoms at the time of the diagnosis of recurrence. There was no difference in overall survival after primary surgery, although survival after the diagnosis of recurrence was significantly longer in the asymptomatic patients (p<0.01). Q-TWiST1 and Q-TWiST2 from the diagnosis of recurrence in the asymptomatic patients were significantly longer. Q-TWiST2 from primary surgery in the asymptomatic patients was significantly longer with some combinations of higher uTOX2 and lower uREL2. In conclusion, the asymptomatic detection of recurrence was associated with significantly longer quality-adjusted survival in comparison to symptomatic detection with some combinations of uTOX2 and uREL2. A prospective evaluation would clarify adequate follow-up methods after radical surgery for breast cancer.

History and current status of the survivorship care program at the University of California, Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center (UCLA JCCC)

As one of the first comprehensive cancer centers to receive a designation from the National Cancer Institute, the Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center at UCLA Health has served as a leader in survivorship research for three decades. A clinical survivorship program for childhood cancer survivors was established in the early 2000s as this became a standard of care in pediatric oncology. However, it was not until receipt of external funding and the establishment of a Survivorship Center of Excellence in 2006 that clinical services were expanded to include adult cancer survivors, as well as survivorship care delivery research in the community and at affiliated clinical sites. When this funding ended, there was limited institutional support for expansion of the program, and so the clinical programs did not develop further. Recently, there has been renewed interest in obtaining Commission on Cancer accreditation, and this has prompted an institutional assessment of survivorship care to inform future activities for system-wide program development. As oncology care expands throughout a large regional health system network, the future survivorship program will need to serve as a common resource for the entire health system by providing a repository of specialized services and resources as well as standard processes and pathways for a cohesive approach to care. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: There are many challenges to development and sustainment of cancer survivorship programs, even in NCI-designated comprehensive cancers. As the delivery of cancer care services expands and becomes more integrated in large health care systems, innovative strategies are needed to ensure delivery of tailored care to cancer survivors through acute treatment and beyond.

Primary care provider attitudes about and tendency to use non-recommended surveillance tests after curative breast cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Little is known about the factors contributing to the receipt of non-recommended surveillance testing among early-stage breast cancer survivors. We assessed primary care providers (PCP) attitudes about and tendency to order non-recommended surveillance testing for asymptomatic early-stage breast cancer survivors post-adjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

A stratified random sample of PCPs identified by early-stage breast cancer survivors were surveyed (N = 518, 61% response rate). PCPs were asked how likely they would be to order bone scans, imaging and/or tumor marker testing using a clinical vignette of an early-stage asymptomatic patient where these tests are non-recommended. A composite tendency to order score was created and categorized by tertiles (low, moderate, high). PCP-reported factors associated with high and moderate tendency to order non-recommended testing (vs. low) were estimated using multivariable, multinomial logistic regression.

RESULTS

In this sample, 26% reported a high tendency to order non-recommended surveillance tests during survivorship for early-stage breast cancer survivors. PCPs who identified as family practice physicians and PCPs reporting more confidence in ordering surveillance testing were more likely to report a high tendency to order non-recommended testing (vs. low) ((aOR family practice 2.09, CI 1.2, 3.8; aOR more confidence 1.9, CI 1.1, 3.3).

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based sample of PCPs caring for breast cancer survivors, over a quarter of PCPs reported they would order non-recommended surveillance testing for asymptomatic early-stage breast cancer survivors. Efforts to better support PCPs and disseminate information about appropriate surveillance for cancer survivors are warranted.

Surveillance Imaging vs Symptomatic Recurrence Detection and Survival in Stage II-III Breast Cancer (AFT-01)

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for follow-up after locoregional breast cancer treatment recommend imaging for distant metastases only in the presence of patient signs and/or symptoms. However, guidelines have not been updated to reflect advances in imaging, systemic therapy, or the understanding of biological subtype. We assessed the association between mode of distant recurrence detection and survival.

METHODS

In this observational study, a stage-stratified random sample of women with stage II-III breast cancer in 2006-2007 and followed through 2016 was selected, including up to 10 women from each of 1217 Commission on Cancer facilities (n = 10 076). The explanatory variable was mode of recurrence detection (asymptomatic imaging vs signs and/or symptoms). The outcome was time from initial cancer diagnosis to death. Registrars abstracted scan type, intent (cancer-related vs not, asymptomatic surveillance vs not), and recurrence. Data were merged with each patient's National Cancer Database record.

RESULTS

Surveillance imaging detected 23.3% (284 of 1220) of distant recurrences (76.7%, 936 of 1220 by signs and/or symptoms). Based on propensity-weighted multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, patients with asymptomatic imaging compared with sign and/or symptom detected recurrences had a lower risk of death if estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) negative, HER2 negative (triple negative; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.54 to 0.99), or HER2 positive (HR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.33 to 0.80). No association was observed for ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative (HR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.91 to 1.44) cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence detection by asymptomatic imaging compared with signs and/or symptoms was associated with lower risk of death for triple-negative and HER2-positive, but not ER- or PR-positive, HER2-negative cancers. A randomized trial is warranted to evaluate imaging surveillance for metastases results in these subgroups.

Changes of Tumor Markers in Patients with Breast Cancer during Postoperative Adjuvant Chemotherapy

Objective

Serum tumor marker (STM) elevation can detect metastasis earlier than imaging diagnosis and, although not recommended by guidelines, is still widely used in clinical practice for postoperative follow-up of breast cancer patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the change rules of CEA and CA153 in patients with HER2-negative breast cancer during postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy and their influencing factors.

Materials and Methods

The medical records of patients with HER2-negative early breast cancer who visited Xuanwu Hospital from September 2018 to June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic characteristics and baseline data of CEA and CA153 at initial diagnosis were collected. Data of CEA, CA153, biochemistry (including ALT, AST, rGT, triglycerides, cholesterol, and blood glucose) and blood routine (including white blood cells, neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, and platelets) were also collected before chemotherapy, at the end of chemotherapy and more than 3 months after the end of chemotherapy. LY/MONO, NEUT/LY, PLT/LY, and systemic immune inflammation index (SII) were calculated and statistically analyzed using SPSSAU software.

Results

A total of 90 patients were enrolled, all of whom were female, with a mean age of 55.11 ± 10.60 y. The value of CEA at initial diagnosis was 2.10 ± 1.11 ng/mL, and high expression was mostly correlated with past history of chronic diseases and tumor lymph node metastasis; the value of CA153 was 11.80 ± 6.60 U/mL, and high expression was correlated with high SII at initial diagnosis. Surgery did not affect the values of serum CEA and CA153. At the end of chemotherapy, CEA and CA153 were 2.68 ± 1.34 ng/mL and 18.51 ± 8.50 U/mL, respectively, which were significantly increased compared with those before chemotherapy, and were linearly correlated with the values before chemotherapy. They decreased (CEA 2.45 ± 1.19 ng/mL, CA153 10.87 ± 5.96 U/mL) again three months after the end of chemotherapy, manifested as "spiking" phenomenon, which was associated with lymph node metastasis at diagnosis, body metabolic disorders, and chronic inflammatory status.

Conclusion

CEA and CA153 were increased presenting as "spiking" phenomena in patients with early HER2-negative breast cancer during postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy, and the peak of increase was linearly correlated with the indicators before chemotherapy. Clinical attention should be paid to this change to avoid excessive diagnosis and treatment leading to medical resource consumption.

Early stage breast cancer follow-up in real-world clinical practice: the added value of cell free circulating tumor DNA

Purpose

Physical examinations and annual mammography (minimal follow-up) are as effective as laboratory/imaging tests (intensive follow-up) in detecting breast cancer (BC) recurrence. This statement is now challenged by the availability of new diagnostic tools for asymptomatic cases. Herein, we analyzed current practices and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) in monitoring high-risk BC patients treated with curative intent in a comprehensive cancer center.

Patients and methods

Forty-two consecutive triple negative BC patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and surgery were prospectively enrolled. Data from plasma samples and surveillance procedures were analyzed to report the diagnostic pattern of relapsed cases, i.e., by symptoms, follow-up procedures and ctDNA.

Results

Besides minimal follow-up, 97% and 79% of patients had at least 1 non-recommended imaging and laboratory tests for surveillance purposes. During a median follow-up of 5.1(IQR, 4.1–5.9) years, 13 events occurred (1 contralateral BC, 1 loco-regional recurrence, 10 metastases, and 1 death). Five recurrent cases were diagnosed by intensive follow-up, 5 by symptoms, and 2 incidentally. ctDNA antedated disseminated disease in all evaluable cases excepted two with bone-only and single liver metastases. The mean time from ctDNA detection to suspicious findings at follow-up imaging was 3.81(SD, 2.68), and to definitive recurrence diagnosis 8(SD, 2.98) months. ctDNA was undetectable in the absence of disease and in two suspected cases not subsequently confirmed.

Conclusions

Some relapses are still symptomatic despite the extensive use of intensive follow-up. ctDNA is a specific test, sensitive enough to detect recurrence before other methods, suitable for clarifying equivocal imaging, and exploitable for salvage therapy in asymptomatic BC survivors.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00432-022-03990-7.

Quality Care in Survivorship: Lessons Learned From the ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative

PURPOSE

The ASCO Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) project was established to evaluate the influence of guideline recommendations on routine clinical practice.

METHODS

QOPI provided summary data from 839 unique practices in which data were collected every six months from the Fall of 2015 to the Spring of 2019. From these data, six items were chosen based on their relationship to domains of survivorship. A zero-inflated negative binomial regression model was used to test for trends in QOPI measures adherence rates over time. The models were adjusted for the time period, region, practice-ownership, multispecialty site, fellowship program, and hospital type.

RESULTS

Smoking cessation counseling recommended and smoking cessation counseling administered or referred both increased over time, 50%-61% (adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR), 1.028; 95% CI, 1.016 to 1.040; P < .001) and 34%-49% (adjusted IRR, 1.052; 95% CI, 1.035 to 1.070; P < .001), respectively. Infertility risks discussed before chemotherapy increased from 36% to 53% (adjusted IRR, 1.056; 95% CI, 1.035 to 1.078; P < .001) and fertility options discussed or referred to specialists increased from 23% to 38% (adjusted IRR, 1.074; 95% CI, 1.046 to 1.102; P < .001). Twenty-nine percent documented a positron emission tomography, computed tomography, or bone scan within the first 12 months for women diagnosed with early breast cancer treated for curative intent (adjusted IRR, 1.000; 95% CI, 0.977 to 1.024; P = .971). Tumor marker surveillance within 12 months increased from 78% to 87% (adjusted IRR, 1.018; 95% CI, 1.002 to 1.033; P = .023).

CONCLUSION

As scientific evidence to guide cancer survivorship care grows, the role of guideline recommendations permeating clinical practice using quality metrics will become increasingly important.

Detection of secondary metastatic breast cancer by measurement of plasma CA 15.3

BACKGROUND

Most current guidelines do not recommend the serial analysis of tumour marker CA 15.3 in the follow-up of asymptomatic patients treated for early breast cancer (EBC). These guidelines are based on small-scale studies carried out in an era with more limited treatment options than today. In our large academic centre, serial measurements of CA 15.3 are used routinely in the follow-up of EBC, whereas imaging for distant metastases is only carried out on indication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this retrospective single-centre study, patients were included if they were treated for EBC between 1 January 2000 and 1 January 2018, diagnosed with secondary metastatic disease at least 6 months after initial surgery and had CA 15.3 available at the time of diagnosis of metastases. The primary objective was to evaluate the proportion of patients in whom metastatic disease was discovered by an increasing CA 15.3. Information on the method of metastases detection, CA 15.3 evolution and survival was collected after approval of the ethics committee.

RESULTS

At the moment of diagnosis of metastases, 451 of 730 included patients (62%) had CA 15.3 levels above the upper limit of normal (>30 kU/l). In 269 patients (37%), an increasing CA 15.3 was the first sign that led to the diagnosis of metastases. This was most frequent in luminal A-like tumours (48%) and in liver (45%) and bone (41%) localisation of metastases. By contrast, reported symptoms triggered the diagnosis of metastatic disease in 48% of the patients. Median overall survival was significantly longer when the relapse was discovered by CA 15.3 elevation versus those discovered by another trigger (abnormal clinical examination or history, abnormal laboratory tests or an incidental finding) (35 versus 22 months; P = 0.0027).

CONCLUSION

When CA 15.3 is systematically used in the follow-up of EBC patients, the diagnosis of metastatic disease is made in 37% by a CA 15.3 increase.

Intensity of metastasis screening and survival outcomes in patients with breast cancer

Previous randomized trials, performed decades ago, showed no survival benefit of intensive screening for distant metastasis in breast cancer. However, recent improvements in targeted therapies and diagnostic accuracy of imaging have again raised the question of the clinical benefit of screening for distant metastasis. Therefore, we investigated the association between the use of modern imaging and survival of patients with breast cancer who eventually developed distant metastasis. We retrospectively reviewed data of 398 patients who developed distant metastasis after their initial curative treatment between January 2000 and December 2015. Patients in the less-intensive surveillance group (LSG) had significantly longer relapse-free survival than did patients in the intensive surveillance group (ISG) (8.7 vs. 22.8 months; p = 0.002). While the ISG showed worse overall survival than the LSG did (50.2 vs. 59.9 months; p = 0.015), the difference was insignificant after adjusting for other prognostic factors. Among the 225 asymptomatic patients whose metastases were detected on imaging, the intensity of screening did not affect overall survival. A small subgroup of patients showed poor survival outcomes when they underwent intensive screening. Patients with HR-/HER2 + tumors and patients who developed lung metastasis in the LSG had better overall survival than those in the ISG did. Highly intensive screening for distant metastasis in disease-free patients with breast cancer was not associated with significant survival benefits, despite the recent improvements in therapeutic options and diagnostic techniques.

Patterns of Surveillance Advanced Imaging and Serum Tumor Biomarker Testing Following Launch of the Choosing Wisely Initiative

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess advanced imaging (bone scan, CT, or PET/CT) and serum tumor biomarker use in asymptomatic breast cancer survivors during the surveillance period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Cancer registry records for 2,923 women diagnosed with primary breast cancer in Washington State between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2014, were linked with claims data from 2 regional commercial insurance plans. Clinical data including demographic and tumor characteristics were collected. Evaluation and management codes from claims data were used to determine advanced imaging and serum tumor biomarker testing during the peridiagnostic and surveillance phases of care. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify clinical factors and patterns of peridiagnostic imaging and biomarker testing associated with surveillance advanced imaging.

RESULTS

Of 2,923 eligible women, 16.5% (n=480) underwent surveillance advanced imaging and 31.8% (n=930) received surveillance serum tumor biomarker testing. Compared with women diagnosed before the launch of the Choosing Wisely campaign in 2012, later diagnosis was associated with lower use of surveillance advanced imaging (odds ratio [OR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.89). Factors significantly associated with use of surveillance advanced imaging included increasing disease stage (stage III: OR, 3.65; 95% CI, 2.48-5.38), peridiagnostic advanced imaging use (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.33-2.31), and peridiagnostic serum tumor biomarker testing (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.01-1.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Although use of surveillance advanced imaging in asymptomatic breast cancer survivors has declined since the launch of the Choosing Wisely campaign, frequent use of surveillance serum tumor biomarker testing remains prevalent, representing a potential target for further efforts to reduce low-value practices.

Identifying tests related to breast cancer care in claims data

To develop a method for calculating rates of testing for breast cancer recurrence in patients who have already undergone initial treatment for breast cancer, we calculated rates in a cohort of Medicare breast cancer patients and an age-matched noncancer cohort. We first used only tests with claims including diagnosis codes indicating invasive breast cancer and then used all tests regardless of diagnosis code. For each method, we calculated testing rates in the breast cancer cohort above the background rate in the noncancer population. The two methods provided similar estimates of testing prevalence and frequency, with exception of prevalence of CT.

Continuity of Care, Follow-Up Care, and Outcomes among Breast Cancer Survivors

This retrospective cohort study examined the effects of care continuity on the utilization of follow-up services and outcome of breast cancer patients (stages I-III) in the post-treatment phase of care. Propensity score matching and generalized estimation equations were used in the analysis of data obtained from national longitudinal databases. The continuity of care index (COCI) was calculated separately for primary care physicians (PCP) and oncologists. Our results revealed that breast cancer survivors with a higher oncology COCI were more likely than those with a lower oncology COCI to use mammography or breast ultrasound during the follow-up period (OR = 1.26, 95% CI: 1.19-1.32; OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.18; respectively). In terms of health outcomes, a higher oncology COCI was associated with a lower likelihood of hospitalization (OR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.71-0.85) and emergency department use (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.82-0.95). A higher PCP COCI was also associated with a lower likelihood of hospitalization (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.70-0.85) and emergency department use (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.68-0.82). Overall, this study determined that ambulatory care continuity is positively associated with the likelihood of using recommended follow-up care services and negatively associated with adverse health events among breast cancer survivors.

Survivorship Care Plan Implementation in US Cancer Programs: a National Survey of Cancer Care Providers

Survivorship care plans (SCPs)-documents intended to improve care for cancer survivors who have completed active treatment-are required, yet implementation is poor. We sought to understand SCP implementation in cancer programs in the USA with the objective of identifying opportunities for improvement. We recruited cancer care providers in the USA via several cancer care networks to participate in a survey regarding SCP implementation. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data. Three hundred ninety-five providers from diverse cancer programs in 47 states and Washington, DC responded to the survey. The timing of SCP implementation varied across and within cancer programs, with approximately 40% of respondents reporting developing SCPs more than 3 months after primary treatment or adjuvant therapy completion. Nurse navigators were responsible for 48-58% of each stage of SCP implementation. Processes that could have been automated often occurred in-person or via phone and vice versa. Respondents reported spending more than 2 h per SCP to complete all stages of implementation, of which less than a third was reimbursed by third-party payers. We identified several opportunities for improving SCP implementation, including broadening the base of responsibility, optimizing modes of communication, decreasing the time required and increasing the funding available, and limiting variation in SCP implementation across and within cancer programs. Future work should assess the influence of approaches to SCP implementation on desired outcomes.

Temporal trends and regional variation in the utilization of low-value breast cancer care: has the Choosing Wisely campaign made a difference?

PURPOSE

Since 2012, about 80 specialty societies have released Choosing Wisely (CW) recommendations aimed at reducing the use of low-value, unproven, or ineffective medical services. The extent to which these recommendations have influenced the behavior of physicians and patients remains largely unknown.

METHODS

Using MarketScan Commercial Claims and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits databases, we identified annual cohorts of women with incident, early-stage breast cancer and estimated the prevalence of four initial treatment and six surveillance metrics deemed as low-value breast cancer care by CW. Multivariable logistic regressions were subsequently used to estimate temporal trends and regional variation in the use of these metrics, with a special focus on the year of CW's publication.

RESULTS

There were 122,341 women identified as undergoing treatment for incident breast cancer between 2010 and 2014. Two of the four low-value initial treatment metrics and four of the six low-value surveillance metrics declined significantly over time. The temporal trend of declining use, however, preceded the release of CW's guidelines. Declines ranged from 11.0% for follow-up mammography to 40.6% for receipt of surgical biopsy without an attempted needle biopsy. There were marked regional differences in use of low-value breast cancer care for all metrics, much of which persisted after publication of CW.

CONCLUSIONS

With two notable exceptions, use of low-value breast cancer care has declined steadily since 2010. The declines, however, were not accelerated by the publication of CW recommendations.

Intensive Imaging Surveillance of Survivors of Breast Cancer May Increase Risk of Radiation-induced Malignancy

BACKGROUND

Current clinical guidelines recommend mammography as the only imaging method for surveillance in asymptomatic survivors of early breast cancer (EBC). However, non-recommended tests are commonly used. We estimated the imaging radiation-induced malignancies (IRIM) risks in survivors of EBC undergoing different imaging surveillance models.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We built 5 theoretical models of imaging surveillance, from annual mammography only (model 1) to increasingly imaging-intensive approaches, including computed tomography (CT) scan, positron emission tomography-CT, bone scan, and multigated acquisition scan (models 2 through 5). Using the National Cancer Institute's Radiation Risk Assessment Tool, we compared the excess lifetime attributable cancer risk (LAR) for hypothetical survivors of EBC starting surveillance at the ages of 30, 60, or 75 years and ending at 81 years.

RESULTS

For all age groups analyzed, there is a statistically significant increase in LAR when comparing model 1 with more intensive models. As an example, in a patient beginning surveillance at the age of 60 years, there is a 28.5-fold increase in the IRIM risk when comparing mammography only versus a schedule with mammography plus CT scan of chest-abdomen and bone scan. We found no differences when comparing models 2 through 5. LAR is higher when surveillance starts at a younger age, although the age effect was only statistically significant in model 1.

CONCLUSION

Non-recommended imaging during EBC surveillance can be associated with a significant increase in LAR. In addition to the lack of survival benefit, additional tests may have significant IRIM risks and should be avoided.

An individual reference limit of the serum CEA-TPA-CA 15-3 tumor marker panel in the surveillance of asymptomatic women following surgery for primary breast cancer

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the combined measurement of serum CEA, TPA, and CA 15-3, using an individual reference limit (IRL), for predicting distant metastases in asymptomatic women following a diagnosis of primary breast cancer.

Methods

A total of 231 patients were followed up for a mean of 5.5±1.6 years. An IRL for defining critical changes (CCs) in marker levels was used as a warning signal of pending distant metastases.

Results

Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the combined CEA-TPA-CA 15-3 marker panel for predicting patient outcome were 95.2%, 97.8%, and 97.9%, respectively. In all, 19 (8.3%) patients relapsed with a mean lead time to radiological evidence of metastases of 11.7±13.8 months.

Conclusion

We concluded that the combined measurement of CA 15-3, CEA, and TPA using an IRL for determining the CC in markers levels is an accurate strategy for predicting outcome during postoperative monitoring of asymptomatic breast cancer patients. Whether the early prediction of metastasis and subsequent administration of therapy impacts on patient outcome should now be the objective of a prospective clinical trial. The marker panel described here could serve as the basis for such a trial.

Blood-based biomarkers in breast cancer: From proteins to circulating tumor cells to circulating tumor DNA

Biomarkers are the key to personalized treatment in patients with breast cancer. While tissue biomarkers are most useful in determining prognosis and upfront predicting response to therapy, circulating protein biomarkers such as CA 15-3 and carcinoembryonic antigen are mainly used in monitoring response to endocrine or chemotherapy in patients with advanced disease. Although several centers measure biomarkers in asymptomatic patients following curative surgery for primary breast cancer, the clinical utility of this practice is unclear. Promising new biomarkers for breast cancer include circulating tumor DNA and circulating tumor cells. In contrast to circulating protein biomarkers, measurement of circulating tumor DNA–based biomarkers is potentially useful in identifying mechanisms of resistance to ongoing therapies as well as identifying new targets for further treatment. To increase clinical utility, both the established and emerging circulating biomarkers should where possible be incorporated into randomized trials evaluating new therapies in patients with breast cancer.

A National Study of the Use of Asymptomatic Systemic Imaging for Surveillance Following Breast Cancer Treatment (AFT-01)

BACKGROUND

Although not guideline recommended, studies suggest 50% of locoregional breast cancer patients undergo systemic imaging during follow-up, prompting its inclusion as a Choosing Wisely measure of potential overuse. Most studies rely on administrative data that cannot delineate scan intent (prompted by signs/symptoms vs. asymptomatic surveillance). This is a critical gap as intent is the only way to distinguish overuse from appropriate care.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to assess surveillance systemic imaging post-breast cancer treatment in a national sample accounting for scan intent.

METHODS

A stage-stratified random sample of 10 women with stage II-III breast cancer in 2006-2007 was selected from each of 1217 Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities, for a total of 10,838 patients. Registrars abstracted scan type (computed tomography [CT], non-breast magnetic resonance imaging, bone scan, positron emission tomography/CT) and intent (cancer-related vs. not, asymptomatic surveillance vs. not) from medical records for 5 years post-diagnosis. Data were merged with each patient's corresponding National Cancer Database record, containing sociodemographic and tumor/treatment information.

RESULTS

Of 10,838 women, 30% had one or more, and 12% had two or more, systemic surveillance scans during a 4-year follow-up period. Patients were more likely to receive surveillance imaging in the first follow-up year (lower proportions during subsequent years) and if they had estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor-negative tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

Locoregional breast cancer patients undergo asymptomatic systemic imaging during follow-up despite guidelines recommending against it, but at lower rates than previously reported. Providers appear to use factors that confer increased recurrence risk to tailor decisions about systemic surveillance imaging, perhaps reflecting limitations of data on which current guidelines are based. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02171078.

Factors associated with imaging in patients with early breast cancer after initial treatment

Background

Overuse of surveillance imaging in patients after curative treatment for early breast cancer (ebc) was recently identified as one of the Choosing Wisely Canada initiatives to improve the quality of cancer care. We undertook a population-level examination of imaging practices in Ontario as they existed before the launch of that initiative.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with ebc between 2006 and 2010 in Ontario were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Records were linked deterministically to provincial health care databases to obtain comprehensive follow-up. We identified all advanced imaging exams [aies: computed tomography (ct), bone scan, positron-emission tomography] and basic imaging exams (bies: ultrasonography, chest radiography) occurring within the first 2 years after curative treatment. Poisson regression was used to assess associations between patient or provider characteristics and the rate of aies.

Results

Of 30,006 women with ebc, 58.6% received at least 1 bie, and 30.6% received at least 1 aie in year 1 after treatment. In year 2, 52.7% received at least 1 bie, and 25.7% received at least 1 aie. The most common aies were chest cts and bone scans. The rate of aies increased with older age, higher disease stage, comorbidity, chemotherapy exposure, and prior staging investigations (p < 0.001). Imaging was ordered mainly by medical oncologists (38%), followed by primary care physicians (23%), surgeons (13%), and emergency room physicians (7%).

Conclusions

Despite recommendations against its use, imaging is common in ebc survivors. Understanding the factors associated with aie use helps to identify areas for further research and is required to lower imaging rates and to improve survivorship care.

Survivorship care plans: are randomized controlled trials assessing outcomes that are relevant to stakeholders?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes assessed in extant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to outcomes that stakeholders expect from survivorship care plans (SCPs). To facilitate the transition from active treatment to follow-up care for the 15.5 million US cancer survivors, many organizations require SCP use. However, results of several RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have been null, possibly because they have evaluated outcomes on which SCPs should be expected to have limited influence. Stakeholders (e.g., survivors, oncologists) may expect outcomes that differ from RCTs' outcomes.

METHODS

We identified RCTs' outcomes using a PubMed literature review. We identified outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs using semistructured interviews with stakeholders in three healthcare systems in the USA and Canada. Finally, we mapped RCTs' outcomes onto stakeholder-identified outcomes.

RESULTS

RCT outcomes did not fully address outcomes that stakeholders expected from SCPs, and RCTs assessed outcomes that stakeholders did not expect from SCPs. RCTs often assessed outcomes only from survivors' perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

RCTs of SCPs' effectiveness have not assessed outcomes that stakeholders expect. To better understand SCPs' effectiveness, future RCTs should assess outcomes of SCP use that are relevant from the perspective of multiple stakeholders.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

SCPs' effectiveness may be optimized when used with an eye toward outcomes that stakeholders expect from SCPs. For survivors, this means using SCPs as a map to guide them with respect to what kind of follow-up care they should seek, when they should seek it, and from whom they should seek it.

Overuse of Health Care Services in the Management of Cancer: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Overuse, the provision of health services for which harms outweigh the benefits, results in suboptimal patient care and may contribute to the rising costs of cancer care. We performed a systematic review of the evidence on overuse in oncology.

METHODS

We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SCOPUS databases, and 2 grey literature sources, for articles published between December 1, 2011 and March 10, 2017. We included publications from December 2011 to evaluate the literature since the inception of the ABIM Foundation's Choosing Wisely initiative in 2012. We included original research articles quantifying overuse of any medical service in patients with a cancer diagnosis when utilizing an acceptable standard to define care appropriateness, excluding studies of cancer screening. One of 4 investigator reviewed titles and abstracts and 2 of 4 reviewed each full-text article and extracted data. Methodology used PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

We identified 59 articles measuring overuse of 154 services related to imaging, procedures, and therapeutics in cancer management. The majority of studies addressed adult or geriatric patients (98%) and focused on US populations (76%); the most studied services were diagnostic imaging in low-risk prostate and breast cancer. Few studies evaluated active cancer therapeutics or interventions aimed at reducing overuse. Rates of overuse varied widely among services and among studies of the same service.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite recent attention to overuse in cancer, evidence identifying areas of overuse remains limited. Broader investigation, including assessment of active cancer treatment, is critical for identifying improvement targets to optimize value in cancer care.

Anxiety, Culture, and Expectations: Oncologist-Perceived Factors Associated With Use of Nonrecommended Serum Tumor Marker Tests for Surveillance of Early-Stage Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

Breast cancer offers several opportunities for reducing use of ineffective practices based on American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines. We assessed oncologist-perceived factors associated with use of one such practice-serum tumor markers for post-treatment breast cancer surveillance-focusing on medical oncologists with high, medium, or low test use.

METHODS

Using a mixed-methods design, we identified patients who had been treated for early-stage breast cancer diagnosed between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2012, within Kaiser Permanente Southern California and calculated the number of tests ordered from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2014. We identified oncologists with high, medium, or low use and subsequently performed semistructured interviews. We used patient satisfaction data to assess association between pattern of use and satisfaction score.

RESULTS

We identified 7,363 patients, with 40,114 tests ordered. High-use oncologists were defined as those ordering at least one test annually for 35% of patients or more, low-use oncologists as those ordering at least one test for 5% of patients or less; 42% of oncologists were high, 27% low, and 31% medium users. We interviewed 17 oncologists: six high, eight low, and three medium users. Factors associated with high use included: perceived patient anxiety, oncologist anxiety, belief that there was nothing else to offer, concern about satisfaction, patient competition, peer use, and system barriers. Factors associated with low use included: beliefs about consequences (eg, causes harms) and medical center culture (eg, collective decision to follow guidelines). We found no association between satisfaction score and pattern of use.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to deimplementation are numerous and complex. Traditional strategies of practice change alone are unlikely to be effective. Multifaceted, multilevel strategies deployed to address patient-, clinician-, and system-related barriers may be required.

Use and Costs of Disease Monitoring in Women With Metastatic Breast Cancer

PURPOSE

The optimal frequency of monitoring patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is unknown; however, data suggest that intensive monitoring does not improve outcomes. We performed a population-based analysis to evaluate patterns and predictors of extreme use of disease-monitoring tests (serum tumor markers [STMs] and radiographic imaging) among women with MBC.

METHODS

The SEER-Medicare database was used to identify women with MBC diagnosed from 2002 to 2011 who underwent disease monitoring. Billing dates of STMs (carcinoembryonic antigen and/or cancer antigen 15-3/cancer antigen 27.29) and imaging tests (computed tomography and/or positron emission tomography) were recorded; if more than one STM or imaging test were completed on the same day, they were counted once. We defined extreme use as > 12 STM and/or more than four radiographic imaging tests in a 12-month period. Multivariable analysis was used to identify factors associated with extreme use. In extreme users, total health care costs and end-of-life health care utilization were compared with the rest of the study population.

RESULTS

We identified 2,460 eligible patients. Of these, 924 (37.6%) were extreme users of disease-monitoring tests. Factors significantly associated with extreme use were hormone receptor-negative MBC (odds ratio [OR], 1.63; 95% CI, 1.27 to 2.08), history of a positron emission tomography scan (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 2.40 to 3.55), and more frequent oncology office visits (OR, 3.14; 95% CI, 2.49 to 3.96). Medical costs per year were 59.2% higher in extreme users. Extreme users were more likely to use emergency department and hospice services at the end of life.

CONCLUSION

Despite an unknown clinical benefit, approximately one third of elderly women with MBC were extreme users of disease-monitoring tests. Higher use of disease-monitoring tests was associated with higher total health care costs. Efforts to understand the optimal frequency of monitoring are needed to inform clinical practice.

Imaging in the evaluation and follow-up of early and advanced breast cancer: When, why, and how often?

Imaging in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with early or advanced breast cancer is an important aspect of cancer care. The role of imaging in breast cancer depends on the goal and should only be performed to guide clinical decisions. Imaging is valuable if a finding will change the course of treatment and improve outcomes, whether this is disease-free survival, overall survival or quality-of-life. In the last decade, imaging is often overused in oncology and contributes to rising healthcare costs. In this context, we review the data that supports the appropriate use of imaging for breast cancer patients. We will discuss: 1) the optimal use of staging imaging in both early (Stage 0-II) and locally advanced (Stage III) breast cancer, 2) the role of surveillance imaging to detect recurrent disease in Stage 0-III breast cancer and 3) how patients with metastatic breast cancer should be followed with advanced imaging.

Follow-up Reality for Breast Cancer Patients - Standardised Survey of Patients and Physicians and Analysis of Treatment Data

Introduction: Currently, about 360 000 breast cancer patients who could, after completion of their primary therapy, take advantage of follow-up options are living in Germany. Up to now very little is known about the extent to which the available options are used and as to how the follow-up reality is experienced and evaluated. Thus, an explorative examination among the patients and their physicians was undertaken. Patients and Methods: All patients who underwent surgery in a certified breast centre between 2007 and 2013 received a standardised questionnaire; at the same time the physicians responsible for the follow-up were invited to answer a standardised questionnaire. Results: 920 patients (response rate: 61 %) with a median age of 65 years (32-95) could be analysed. 99 % of the participants stated that they regularly attended follow-ups. The personal contact with the physician (mean value: 4.4) and the reassurance that the cancer disease had not recurred (mean value: 4.5) were described on a scale of 0 to 5 to be two of the most important factors of the follow-up. Deficits were expressed with regard to psychosocial care (70 %) and the perception and treatment of physical complaints (55 %). In addition, 105 physicians returned completed questionnaires (response rate: 12 %). For asymptomatic patients the physicians performed the following examinations most frequently: anamnesis (92 %), physical examination (87 %) as well as laboratory tests (63 %) and tumour marker determinations (40 %). Conclusion: On the whole it became clear that the vast majority of the patients took advantage of the follow-up options. From the patient's perspective the importance of the follow-up lies in contact to the physician and the comforting assurance that the breast cancer has not relapsed. Deficits are seen in the psychosocial care and the perception and treatment of physical impairments. Not recommended examinations were employed by a significant proportion of the surveyed physicians.

Quality of Posttreatment Care Among Breast Cancer Survivors in the University of California Athena Breast Health Network (Athena)

INTRODUCTION

Multiple oncology providers are involved in the initial breast cancer treatment. To better understand the patterns and quality of posttreatment breast cancer care, we surveyed patients who had been treated at each of the 5 University of California (UC) cancer centers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We identified breast cancer patients diagnosed in 2008-2009 from hospital tumor registries; invitations for the mailed survey on posttreatment care were sent between September 2011 and November 2012. The survey requested information on the number and type of provider visits, discussion of key topics, use of treatment summaries, and survivorship care plans (SCP).

RESULTS

A total of 329 patients completed the survey. The mean age of respondents was 60.5 years, and they were 3.2 years since diagnosis (range, 1.6-4.8 years). A total of 82% had continued posttreatment care at a UC facility, and they reported high numbers of clinical follow-up visits, with an average of > 2 providers (range, 1-5). Surgery-only patients reported an average of 4 to 5 office visits a year; patients who received surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy reported 5 to 6 office visits a year. Overall, 45% of women reported receiving a treatment summary; receipt of a SCP was reported by 59%, occurring significantly more often among those in follow-up at a UC (P = .004).

CONCLUSION

Patients reported visits to multiple providers during their follow-up care, in excess of what is recommended by current guidelines. This was in spite of many women reporting that they had received a SCP.

Use of posttreatment imaging and biomarkers in survivors of early-stage breast cancer: Inappropriate surveillance or necessary care?

BACKGROUND

Advanced imaging and serum biomarkers are commonly used for surveillance in patients with early-stage breast cancer, despite recommendations against this practice. Incentives to perform such low-value testing may be less prominent in integrated health care delivery systems. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate and compare the use of these services within 2 integrated systems: Kaiser Permanente (KP) and Intermountain Healthcare (IH). The authors also sought to distinguish the indication for testing: diagnostic purposes or routine surveillance.

METHODS

Patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage 0 to II breast cancer diagnosed between 2009 and 2010 were identified and the use of imaging and biomarker tests over an 18-month period were quantified, starting at 1 year after diagnosis. Chart abstraction was performed on a random sample of patients who received testing to identify the indication for testing. Multivariate regression was used to explore associations with the use of nonrecommended care.

RESULTS

A total of 6585 patients were identified; 22% had stage 0 disease, 44% had stage I disease, and 34% had stage II disease. Overall, 24% of patients received at least 1 imaging test (25% at KP vs 22% at IH; P = .009) and 28% of patients received at least 1 biomarker (36% at KP vs 13% at IH; P<.001). Chart abstraction revealed that 84% of imaging tests were performed to evaluate symptoms or signs. Virtually all biomarkers were ordered for routine surveillance. Stage of disease, medical center that provided the services, and provider experience were found to be significantly associated with the use of biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced imaging was most often performed for appropriate indications, but biomarkers were used for nonrecommended surveillance. Distinguishing between inappropriate use for surveillance and appropriate diagnostic testing is essential when evaluating adherence to recommendations.

Imaging Radiation Doses and Associated Risks and Benefits in Subjects Participating in Breast Cancer Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Medical imaging is commonly required in breast cancer (BC) clinical trials to assess the efficacy and/or safety of study interventions. Despite the lack of definitive epidemiological data linking imaging radiation with cancer development in adults, concerns exist about the risks of imaging radiation-induced malignancies (IRIMs) in subjects exposed to repetitive imaging. We estimated the imaging radiation dose and IRIM risk in subjects participating in BC trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The imaging protocol requirements in 10 phase III trials in the adjuvant and advanced settings were assessed to estimate the effective radiation dose received by a typical and fully compliant subject in each trial. For each study, the excess lifetime attributable cancer risk (LAR) was calculated using the National Cancer Institute's Radiation Risk Assessment Tool, version 3.7.1. Dose and risk calculations were performed for both imaging intensive and nonintensive approaches to reflect the variability in imaging performed within the studies.

RESULTS

The total effective imaging radiation dose was 0.4-262.2 mSv in adjuvant trials and 26-241.3 mSv in metastatic studies. The dose variability resulted from differing protocol requirements and imaging intensity approaches, with computed tomography, multigated acquisition scans, and bone scans as the major contributors. The mean LAR was 1.87-2,410/100,000 in adjuvant trials (IRIM: 0.0002%-2.41% of randomized subjects) and 6.9-67.3/100,000 in metastatic studies (IRIM: 0.007%-0.067% of subjects).

CONCLUSION

IRIMs are infrequent events. In adjuvant trials, aligning the protocol requirements with the clinical guidelines' surveillance recommendations and substituting radiating procedures with equivalent nonradiating ones would reduce IRIM risk. No significant risk has been observed in metastatic trials, and potential concerns on IRIMs are not justified.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Medical imaging is key in breast cancer (BC) clinical trials. Most of these procedures expose patients to ionizing radiation, and the risk of second cancer development after imaging has prompted recent concerns and controversy. Using accepted calculation models, the number of malignancies were estimated that were potentially attributable to the imaging procedures performed during a patient's participation in BC clinical trials. The results show that for patients participating in metastatic trials, the risk of imaging radiation-induced malignancies is negligible. In adjuvant trials, some second cancers due to imaging could be expected, and measures can be taken to reduce their risk.

Trends in imaging after diagnosis of thyroid cancer

BACKGROUND

The largest growth noted among differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) diagnosis is in low-risk cancers. Trends in imaging after the diagnosis of DTC are understudied. Hypothesizing a reduction in imaging use due to rising low-risk disease, the authors evaluated postdiagnosis imaging patterns over time and patient characteristics that are associated with the likelihood of imaging.

METHODS

Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, the authors identified patients diagnosed with localized, regional, or distant DTC between 1991 and 2009. Medicare claims were reviewed for use of neck ultrasound, iodine-131 (I-131) scan, or positron emission tomography (PET) scan within 3 years after diagnosis. Trends in imaging use were evaluated using regression analyses. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the likelihood of imaging based on patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 23,669 patients were included. Compared with patients diagnosed between 1991 and 2000, those diagnosed between 2001 and 2009 were more likely to have localized disease (P<.001) and tumors measuring <1 cm (P<.001). Use of neck ultrasound and I-131 scans increased in patients with localized disease (P ≤.001 and P = .003, respectively), regional disease (P<.001 and P<.001, respectively), and distant metastasis (P = .001 and P = .015, respectively). Patients diagnosed after 2000 were more likely to undergo neck ultrasound (odds ratio, 2.15; 95% confidence interval, 2.02-2.28) and I-131 scan (odds ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-1.54). Compared with 1996 through 2004, PET scan use from 2005 to 2009 increased 32.4-fold (P≤.001) in patients with localized disease, 13.1-fold (P<.001) in patients with regional disease, and 33.4-fold (P<.001) in patients with distant DTC.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite an increase in the diagnosis of low-risk disease, the use of postdiagnosis imaging increased among patients with all stages of disease. The largest growth observed was in the use of PET after 2004.

Health services utilisation in breast cancer survivors in Taiwan

Surveillance guidelines for breast cancer survivors recommend regular history and physical and mammography, and against routine imaging for detecting distant metastasis. Stage 0, I, II breast cancer cases treated at a major cancer center were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. We used multivariable negative binomial and logistic regression analyses on institutional claims data to examine factors contributing to utilisation patterns of surveillance visits and tests in disease-free survivors. The mean number of surveillance visits during months 13 to 60 after cancer treatment initiation was 18.5 (SD 8.2) among the 2,090 breast cancer survivors followed for at least five years. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, the number of visits was the highest among patients mainly followed by medical oncologists compared to surgeons and radiation oncologists. Patient cohorts treated in more recent years had lower number of visits associated with care coordination effort, the adjusted mean being 19.2 visits for the 2002 cohort, and 16.3 visits for the 2008 cohort (p < 0.0001). Although imaging tests were highly utilised, there was a significant decrease in tumor marker testing from the 2002 to the 2008 treatment cohort (adjusted rate 99.4% to 35.1% respectively, p < 0.0001) in association with an institutional guideline change.

Tumor marker usage and medical care costs among older early-stage breast cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Although American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines discourage the use of tumor marker assessment for routine surveillance in nonmetastatic breast cancer, their use in practice is uncertain. Our objective was to determine use of tumor marker tests such as carcinoembryonic antigen and CA 15-3/CA 27.29 and associated Medicare costs in early-stage breast cancer survivors.

METHODS

By using Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare records for patients diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer between 2001 and 2007, tumor marker usage within 2 years after diagnosis was identified by billing codes. Logistic regression models were used to identify clinical and demographic factors associated with use of tumor markers. To determine impact on costs of care, we used multivariable regression, controlling for other factors known to influence total medical costs.

RESULTS

We identified 39,650 eligible patients. Of these, 16,653 (42%) received at least one tumor marker assessment, averaging 5.7 tests over 2 years, with rates of use per person increasing over time. Factors significantly associated with use included age at diagnosis, diagnosis year, stage at diagnosis, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and urban/rural status. Rates of advanced imaging, but not biopsies, were significantly higher in the assessment group. Medical costs for patients who received at least one test were approximately 29% greater than costs for those who did not, adjusting for other factors.

CONCLUSION

Breast cancer tumor markers are frequently used among women with early-stage disease and are associated with an increase in both diagnostic procedures and total cost of care. A better understanding of factors driving the use of and the potential benefits and harms of surveillance-based tumor marker testing is needed.

Follow-up care for breast cancer survivors: improving patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Appropriate follow-up care is important for improving health outcomes in breast cancer survivors (BCSs) and requires determination of the optimum intensity of clinical examination and surveillance, assessment of models of follow-up care such as primary care-based follow-up, an understanding of the goals of follow-up care, and unique psychosocial aspects of care for these patients. The objective of this systematic review was to identify studies focusing on follow-up care in BCSs from the patient's and physician's perspective or from patterns of care and to integrate primary empirical evidence on the different aspects of follow-up care from these studies.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review and evaluation was conducted for all relevant publications in English from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2013 using electronic databases. Studies were included in the final review if they focused on BCS's preferences and perceptions, physician's perceptions, patterns of care, and effectiveness of follow-up care.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies assessing the different aspects of follow-up care were included in the review, with a majority of studies (n=13) evaluating the pattern of follow-up care in BCSs, followed by studies focusing on BCS's perceptions (n=9) and preferences (n=9). Most of the studies reported variations in recommended frequency, duration, and intensity of follow-up care as well as frequency of mammogram screening. In addition, variations were noted in patient preferences for type of health care provider (specialist versus non-specialist). Further, BCSs perceived a lack of psychosocial support and information for management of side effects.

CONCLUSION

The studies reviewed, conducted in a range of settings, reflect variations in different aspects of follow-up care. Further, this review also provides useful insight into the unique concerns and needs of BCSs for follow-up care. Thus, clinicians and decision-makers need to understand BCS's preferences in providing appropriate follow-up care tailored specifically for each patient.

Breast cancer "tailored follow-up" in Italian oncology units: a web-based survey

Purpose

Breast cancer follow-up procedures after primary treatment are still a controversial issue. Aim of this study was to investigate, through a web-based survey, surveillance methodologies selected by Italian oncologists in everyday clinical practice.

Methods

Referents of Italian medical oncology units were invited to participate to the study via e-mail through the SurveyMonkey website. Participants were asked how, in their institution, exams of disease staging and follow-up are planned in asymptomatic women and if surveillance continues beyond the 5^th year.

Results

Between February and May 2013, 125 out of 233 (53.6%) invited referents of Italian medical oncology units agreed to participate in the survey. Ninety-seven (77.6%) referents state that modalities of breast cancer follow-up are planned according to the risk of disease progression at diagnosis and only 12 (9.6%) oncology units apply the minimal follow-up procedures according to international guidelines. Minimal follow-up is never applied in high risk asymptomatic women. Ninety-eight (78.4%) oncology units continue follow-up in all patients beyond 5 years.

Conclusions

Our survey shows that 90.4% of participating Italian oncology units declare they do not apply the minimal breast cancer follow-up procedures after primary treatment in asymptomatic women, as suggested by national and international guidelines. Interestingly, about 80.0% of interviewed referents performs the so called “tailored follow-up”, high intensity for high risk, low intensity for low risk patients. There is an urgent need of randomized clinical trials able to determine the effectiveness of risk-based follow-up modalities, their ideal frequency and persistence in time.