Trends in screening breast magnetic resonance imaging use among US women, 2006 to 2016

National yearly cost of breast cancer screening in the USA and projected cost of advocated guidelines: a simulation study with life table modelling

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the total national direct cost of breast cancer screening from 2019 to 2022 and project the total national cost and average lifetime cost of screening per woman for three current guidelines.

DESIGN

We estimated the national cost of screening from 2019 to 2022, and per cancer detected in 2022, using real-world data on the number of mammograms performed per year. We also projected the national cost of screening using life table modelling for three guidelines: 2021/2023 American College of Radiology (ACR), 2023 American Cancer Society (ACS) and 2024 United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF). The average lifetime cost to screen one woman until age 74 years with each guideline was also estimated. The Optum Labs Data Warehouse was used to estimate commercial and Medicare costs and recall rates. Sensitivity analyses were used to estimate uncertainty and determine which inputs had the largest impact on total national costs.

SETTING

This study was conducted for the USA.

PARTICIPANTS

Women eligible for breast cancer screening.

INTERVENTIONS

Digital mammograms (2D) or digital breast tomosynthesis (3D) and/or MRI.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Total national cost of screening calculated as the sum of screening and recall costs. Average lifetime cost of screening per woman until 74 years.

RESULTS

Nationally, screening cost approximately US$11 billion (B) per year from 2019 to 2022 with approximately 37% of eligible women screened each year. In 2022, screening cost US$55 471 per 3D-detected and US$44 000 per 2D-detected invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ case. Using target yearly participation rates of 54%-78% by age of women, the projected cost of screening was US$30B for ACR, US$18B for ACS and US$8B for USPSTF guidelines. The average lifetime cost to screen an average-risk woman was: US$13 416 for ACR, US$7946 for ACS and US$6931 for USPSTF. Participation rates, the proportion of women with a lifetime risk>20% and commercial MRI and 3D costs had the largest impact on total costs.

CONCLUSION

The cost of screening varies significantly by guideline (US$8B-US$30B) and was most influenced by participation rates, high-risk population proportions and technology costs. Future work can investigate whether risk-based screening strategies being tested in ongoing clinical trials can reduce national screening costs while improving outcomes.Cite Now.

Breast Cancer MRI Screening of Patients After Multiplex Gene Panel Testing

Importance

Enhanced breast cancer screening with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended to women with elevated risk of breast cancer, yet uptake of screening remains unclear after genetic testing.

Objective

To evaluate uptake of MRI after genetic results disclosure and counseling.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This multicenter cohort study was conducted at the University of Southern California Norris Cancer Hospital, the Los Angeles General Medical Center, and the Stanford University Cancer Institute. Patients were recruited from July 1, 2014, through November 30, 2016. Following multiplex gene panel testing and genetic counseling, patients responded to surveys about breast MRI screening at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and to a final survey between 3 and 4 years after counseling. Participants met standard clinical criteria for genetic testing or had a 2.5% or greater probability of inherited cancer susceptibility. Patients were categorized based on breast cancer risk from genetic testing results and Tyrer-Cuzick model-calculated risk as having (1) a BRCA or other high-risk pathogenic variant (PV), (2) a moderate-risk PV, (3) a higher lifetime breast cancer risk (≥20%), or (4) a lower lifetime breast cancer risk (<20%). Analysis was conducted from September 28 to November 9, 2023.

Interventions

Genetic testing with a 25- or 28-gene panel, and pretest and posttest genetic counseling by a genetic counselor or an advanced practice genetics nurse practitioner, which included cancer-specific screening recommendations.

Main Outcomes and Measures

MRI screening adherence over time across risk groups was estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. Likelihood of screening adherence (odds ratios [ORs] with 95% CIs), controlling for potential confounders, was estimated using logistic regression.

Results

This study included 638 patients, with a mean (SD) age of 50.7 (13.3) years at testing. There were 43 patients (6.7%) with a BRCA or other high-risk PV, 16 (2.5%) with a moderate-risk PV, 146 (22.9%) with higher lifetime breast cancer risk, and 433 (67.9%) with lower lifetime breast cancer risk. A total of 52 patients (8.2%) identified as Asian, 21 (3.3%) as Black, 271 (42.5%) as Hispanic, and 255 (40.0) as White. Compared with patients with lower lifetime breast cancer risk, patients with a BRCA or other high-risk PV and those with a moderate-risk PV were approximately 10 times (OR, 9.81 [95% CI, 4.05-23.86]; P < .001) and 4 times (OR, 4.12 [95% CI, 1.10-14.35]; P = .03) as likely to undergo MRI, respectively. Patients with a BRCA or other high-risk PV were nearly 16 times (OR, 15.81 [95% CI, 5.17-48.31]) as likely to report consistent yearly MRI screening compared with patients with lower lifetime risk.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, women with inherited PVs conferring increased breast cancer risk had higher and more consistent MRI uptake than women with lower estimated risk. These findings emphasize the importance of genetic cancer risk assessment for effective enhanced breast cancer screening.

Barriers and facilitators to breast cancer screening among high-risk women: a qualitative study

PURPOSE

Women with greater than 20-25% lifetime breast cancer risk are recommended to have breast cancer screening with annual mammogram and supplemental breast MRI. However, few women follow these screening recommendations. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators of screening among women at high risk for breast cancer, guided by the Health Services Utilization Model (HSUM).

METHODS

Unaffected high-risk women (N=63) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews exploring their experiences with breast cancer screening. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a combined deductive and inductive approach.

RESULTS

Most participants (84%) had received a screening mammogram; fewer (33%) had received a screening breast MRI. Only 14% had received neither screening. In line with the HSUM, qualitative analysis identified predisposing factors, enabling factors, and need factors associated with receipt of breast cancer screening. Enabling factors - including financial burden, logistic barriers, social support, and care coordination - were most frequently discussed. Predisposing factors included knowledge, health beliefs, and self-advocacy. Need factors included healthcare provider recommendation, family history of breast cancer, and personal medical history. Although HSUM themes were consistent for both mammography and breast MRI, participants did highlight several important differences in barriers and facilitators between the two screening modalities.

CONCLUSION

Barriers and enabling factors associated with supplemental screening for high-risk women represent possible intervention targets. Future research is needed to develop and test multilevel interventions targeting these factors, with the ultimate goal of increasing access to supplemental screening for high-risk women.

Strategies for Identifying and Recruiting Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer for Research Outside of Clinical Settings: Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Research is needed to understand and address barriers to risk management for women at high (≥20% lifetime) risk for breast cancer, but recruiting this population for research studies is challenging.

OBJECTIVE

This paper compares a variety of recruitment strategies used for a cross-sectional, observational study of high-risk women.

METHODS

Eligible participants were assigned female at birth, aged 25-85 years, English-speaking, living in the United States, and at high risk for breast cancer as defined by the American College of Radiology. Individuals were excluded if they had a personal history of breast cancer, prior bilateral mastectomy, medical contraindications for magnetic resonance imaging, or were not up-to-date on screening mammography per American College of Radiology guidelines. Participants were recruited from August 2020 to January 2021 using the following mechanisms: targeted Facebook advertisements, Twitter posts, ResearchMatch (a web-based research recruitment database), community partner promotions, paper flyers, and community outreach events. Interested individuals were directed to a secure website with eligibility screening questions. Participants self-reported method of recruitment during the eligibility screening. For each recruitment strategy, we calculated the rate of eligible respondents and completed surveys, costs per eligible participant, and participant demographics.

RESULTS

We received 1566 unique responses to the eligibility screener. Participants most often reported recruitment via Facebook advertisements (724/1566, 46%) and ResearchMatch (646/1566, 41%). Community partner promotions resulted in the highest proportion of eligible respondents (24/46, 52%), while ResearchMatch had the lowest proportion of eligible respondents (73/646, 11%). Word of mouth was the most cost-effective recruitment strategy (US $4.66 per completed survey response) and paper flyers were the least cost-effective (US $1448.13 per completed survey response). The demographic characteristics of eligible respondents varied by recruitment strategy: Twitter posts and community outreach events resulted in the highest proportion of Hispanic or Latina women (1/4, 25% and 2/6, 33%, respectively), and community partner promotions resulted in the highest proportion of non-Hispanic Black women (4/24, 17%).

CONCLUSIONS

Although recruitment strategies varied in their yield of study participants, results overall support the feasibility of identifying and recruiting women at high risk for breast cancer outside of clinical settings. Researchers must balance the associated costs and participant yield of various recruitment strategies in planning future studies focused on high-risk women.

Measuring patient-reported distress from breast magnetic resonance imaging: Development and validation of the MRI-related distress scale (MRI-DS)

OBJECTIVE

Although breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a valuable screening tool, breast MRI testing burden was associated with cancer worry and quality of life. We aimed to develop and validate the MRI-related distress scale (MRI-DS) to assess comprehensive distress specifically related to breast MRI.

METHODS

We enrolled women aged above 18 years, diagnosed breast cancer, had MRI examination at least one time, and who could speak and read Korean in phase I and enrolled women aged above 18 years, visited outpatient clinic of breast general surgery, had undergone MRI examination at least once, and could speak and read Korean in phase II. We excluded patients who had any physical or psychiatric conditions in both phases. We recruited from a tertiary university-based hospital in South Korea between April and August 2023.

RESULTS

All 18 items had acceptable levels of item correlation (≥0.30) in the explanatory factor analysis with a four-factor solution. The fit indices for the four-factor solution model were good. The discriminant validity of the MRI-DS had a moderate correlation with general anxiety or quality of life. In the known-group analysis, those who reported MRI as the most burden breast examination had higher total scores.

CONCLUSION

The validity of the MRI-DS has been confirmed as a scale for measuring the specific distress caused by breast MRI. The MRI-DS is recommended to health professional to communicate with patients with MRI.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

It can be used to assess the distress associated with MRI screening in breast cancer patients. Physician could use MRI-DS to discuss the reasons for distress caused by breast MRI screening and to address specific sources of discomfort associated with it.

Update on Management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents 18% to 25% of all diagnosed breast cancers, and is a noninvasive, nonobligate precursor lesion to invasive cancer. The diagnosis of DCIS represents a wide range of disease, including lesions with both low and high risk of progression to invasive cancer and recurrence. Over the past decade, research on the topic of DCIS has focused on the possibility of tailoring treatment for patients according to their risk for progression and recurrence, which is based on clinicopathologic, biomolecular and genetic factors. These efforts are ongoing, with recently completed and continuing clinical trials spanning the continuum of cancer care. We conducted a review to identify recent advances on the topic of diagnosis, risk stratification and management of DCIS. While novel imaging techniques have increased the rate of DCIS diagnosis, questions persist regarding the optimal management of lesions that would not be identified with conventional methods. Additionally, among trials investigating the potential for omission of surgery and use of active surveillance, 2 trials have completed accrual and 2 clinical trials are continuing to enroll patients. Identification of novel genetic patterns is expanding our potential for risk stratification and aiding our ability to de-escalate radiation and systemic therapies for DCIS. These advances provide hope for tailoring of DCIS treatment in the near future.

Self-reported barriers to screening breast MRI among women at high risk for breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Annual screening breast MRI is recommended for women at high (≥ 20% lifetime) breast cancer risk, but is underutilized. Guided by the Health Services Utilization Model (HSUM), we assessed factors associated with screening breast MRI among high-risk women.

METHODS

From August 2020-January 2021, we recruited an online convenience sample of high-risk women ages 25-85 (N = 232). High-risk was defined as: pathogenic genetic mutation in self or first-degree relative; history of lobular carcinoma in situ; history of thoracic radiation; or estimated lifetime risk ≥ 20%. Participants self-reported predisposing factors (breast cancer knowledge, health locus of control), enabling factors (health insurance type, social support), need factors (perceived risk, screening-supportive social norms, provider recommendation), and prior receipt of screening breast MRI. Multivariable logistic regression analysis with backward selection identified HSUM factors associated with receipt of screening breast MRI.

RESULTS

About half (51%) of participants had received a provider recommendation for screening breast MRI; only 32% had ever received a breast MRI. Breast cancer knowledge (OR = 1.15, 95% CI = 1.04-1.27) and screening-supportive social norms (OR = 2.21, 95% CI = 1.64-2.97) were positively related to breast MRI receipt. No other HSUM variables were associated with breast MRI receipt (all p's > 0.1).

CONCLUSIONS

High-risk women reported low uptake of screening breast MRI, indicating a gap in guideline-concordant care. Breast cancer knowledge and screening-supportive social norms are two key areas to target in future interventions. Data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic and generalizability of results is unclear. Future studies with larger, more heterogeneous samples are needed to replicate these findings.

Longitudinal adherence to breast cancer surveillance following cancer genetic testing in an integrated health care system

PURPOSE

Screening with mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is an important risk management strategy for individuals with inherited pathogenic variants (PVs) in genes associated with increased breast cancer risk. We describe longitudinal screening adherence in individuals who underwent cancer genetic testing as part of usual care in a vertically integrated health system.

METHODS

We determined the proportion time covered (PTC) by annual mammography and breast MRI for individuals with PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, and ATM. We determined time covered by biennial mammography beginning at age 50 years for individuals who received negative results, uncertain results, or with PVs in genes without specific breast cancer screening recommendations.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty individuals had PVs in TP53, BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, NF1, CHEK2, or ATM. Among these individuals, average PTC was 48% (range 0-99%) for annual screening mammography and 34% (range 0-100%) for annual breast MRI. Average PTC was highest for individuals with PVs in CHEK2 (N = 14) and lowest for individuals with PVs in TP53 (N = 3). Average PTC for biennial mammography (N = 1,027) was 49% (0-100%).

CONCLUSION

Longitudinal screening adherence in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes, as measured by the proportion of time covered, is low; adherence to annual breast MRI falls below that of annual mammography. Additional research should examine screening behavior in individuals with PVs in breast cancer associated genes with a goal of developing interventions to improve adherence to recommended risk management.

Patterns of Screening Mammography and Breast MRI During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Retrospective, Chart-Review Study

Objective

This study examined patterns of breast cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

This retrospective study was approved by the Georgetown University IRB. Review of electronic medical records identified screening mammograms and breast MRIs between March 13, 2018 and December 31, 2020, for female patients aged 18 to 85 years. Descriptive statistics characterized patterns of breast cancer screening before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Logistic regression analyses examined whether receipt of breast MRI differed over time and demographic and clinical factors associated with receipt of breast MRI in 2020.

Results

Data included 47 956 mammography visits in 32 778 patients and 407 screening breast MRI visits in 340 patients. After an initial decrease following the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic, both screening mammograms and screening breast MRI demonstrated early recovery. Although the mammography receipt remained sustained, the receipt of screening breast MRI decreased in late 2020. Odds of having a breast MRI did not differ between 2018 and 2019 (OR = 1.07; 95% CI = 0.92%-1.25%; P = 0.384) but were significantly lower in 2020 versus 2019 (OR = 0.76; 95% CI = 0.61%-0.94%; P = 0.011). No demographic or clinical factors were associated with receipt of breast MRI during the COVID-19 pandemic (all P-values ≥0.225).

Conclusion

Breast cancer screening decreased following the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. Although both procedures demonstrated early recovery, the rebound in screening breast MRI was not sustained. Interventions promoting return to screening breast MRI may be needed for high-risk women.

Breast Cancer Screening Utilization and Outcomes in Women With Neurofibromatosis Type 1

INTRODUCTION

Women with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) have up to a 5-fold increased risk for breast cancer before age 50 and a 3.5-fold increased risk of breast cancer overall. The purpose of our study was to assess breast cancer screening utilization and outcomes in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This IRB approved HIPAA compliant study retrospectively assessed consecutive NF1 patients (January 2012-December 2021) with recorded clinical visits and/or breast imaging. Patient demographics, risk factors, and screening mammogram and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) outcomes were recorded. Descriptive statistics were obtained and standard breast screening measures were calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven women (median age 43, range 30-82) were eligible for screening based on current NCCN guidelines. A total of 86% (95/111) of all patients and 80% (24/30) of patients under age 40 had at least 1 mammogram. In contrast, 28% (31/111) of all patients and 33% (25/76) of patients ages 30 to 50 had at least 1 screening MRI. Of 368 screening mammograms performed, 38 of 368 (10%) resulted in the recall, and 22 of 368 (6%) resulted in a biopsy. Of 48 screening MRIs performed, 19 of 48 (40%) short-term follow-ups and 12 of 48 (25%) biopsies were recommended. All 6 screen-detected cancers in our cohort were detected initially on screening mammograms.

CONCLUSION

Results confirm the utility and performance of screening mammography in the NF1 population. The low utilization of MRI in our cohort limits the evaluation of outcomes via this modality and suggests there may be an education or interest gap among referrers and patients regarding supplemental screening recommendations.

Effect of an Educational Intervention on Women's Health Care Provider Knowledge Gaps About Breast Cancer Risk Model Use and High-risk Screening Recommendations

OBJECTIVE

To assess effectiveness of a web-based educational intervention on women's health care provider knowledge of breast cancer risk models and high-risk screening recommendations.

METHODS

A web-based pre- and post-test study including 177 U.S.-based women's health care providers was conducted in 2019. Knowledge gaps were defined as fewer than 75% of respondents answering correctly. Pre- and post-test knowledge differences (McNemar test) and associations of baseline characteristics with pre-test knowledge gaps (logistic regression) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Respondents included 131/177 (74.0%) physicians; 127/177 (71.8%) practiced obstetrics/gynecology. Pre-test, 118/177 (66.7%) knew the Gail model predicts lifetime invasive breast cancer risk; this knowledge gap persisted post-test [(121/177, 68.4%); P = 0.77]. Just 39.0% (69/177) knew the Gail model identifies women eligible for risk-reducing medications; this knowledge gap resolved. Only 48.6% (86/177) knew the Gail model should not be used to identify women meeting high-risk MRI screening guidelines; this deficiency decreased to 66.1% (117/177) post-test (P = 0.001). Pre-test, 47.5% (84/177) knew the Tyrer-Cuzick model is used to identify women meeting high-risk screening MRI criteria, 42.9% (76/177) to predict BRCA1/2 pathogenic mutation risk, and 26.0% (46/177) to predict lifetime invasive breast cancer risk. These knowledge gaps persisted but improved. For a high-risk 30-year-old, 67.8% (120/177) and 54.2% (96/177) pre-test knew screening MRI and mammography/tomosynthesis are recommended, respectively; 19.2% (34/177) knew both are recommended; and 53% (94/177) knew US is not recommended. These knowledge gaps resolved or reduced.

CONCLUSION

Web-based education can reduce important provider knowledge gaps about breast cancer risk models and high-risk screening recommendations.

Use of breast surveillance between women with pathogenic variants and variants of uncertain significance in breast cancer susceptibility genes

BACKGROUND

Use of surveillance mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been understudied among women with variant of uncertain significance (VUS) compared to pathogenic and likely pathogenic variants (P/LP).

METHODS

Using data from two cancer settings, we calculated use of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) and surveillance during each 13-month span after genetic testing up to 6 years afterwards for a cohort of genetically elevated risk women.

RESULTS

Of 889 women, VUS carriers were less likely to undergo RRM compared to those with P/LP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.17; p = <.001) and high-risk women were more likely to undergo RRM than average-risk women (HR, 3.91; p = .005). Longitudinally, surveillance use among unaffected women decreased from 49.8% in the first year to 31.2% in the sixth year after genetic testing. In comparison, a greater proportion of women with a personal history of breast cancer underwent surveillance, which increased from 59.3% in the first year to 63.6% in the sixth year after genetic testing. Mammography rates did not differ between women with P/LP and VUS within the first 13 months after genetic testing and up to 4 years afterward. Over the first 4 years after genetic testing, women with VUS were less likely to undergo annual MRIs compared to P/LP.

CONCLUSION

The authors found that VUS, whether in high or moderate penetrance breast cancer susceptibility genes, was associated with lower use of annual breast MRI compared to P/LP variants and equivalent use of annual mammography. These results add important evidence regarding VUS-related breast surveillance.

Recent Trends in Screening Breast MRI

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess trends in screening breast MRI utilization among privately insured women in the U.S. from 2007 to 2017.

METHODS

The utilization of screening breast MRI among women aged 25-64 years from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, was obtained using the MarketScan Commercial Database. We used Current Procedural Terminology codes to exclude breast MRI exams performed in women with a new breast cancer diagnosis and in women imaged to assess response to neoadjuvant therapy in the preceding 90 days. During the 11-year study, 351 763 study-eligible women underwent 488 852 MRI scans.

RESULTS

An overall 55.0% increase in screening breast MRI utilization was observed over the study period, with a steadily increasing trend. The greatest annual increase in percent utilization was from 2007 to 2008 at 16.6%. The highest utilization rate was in 2017, in which 0.4% of women aged 25-64 years underwent screening breast MRI. Of the women who underwent screening MRI with sufficient follow-up, 76.5% underwent only one examination during the study period.

CONCLUSION

Utilization of screening breast MRI has increased steadily in the past decade to a peak of 0.4% of adult women. However, an estimated 9% of U.S. women are eligible for high-risk breast MRI screening; thus, utilization falls short of optimal compliance. Further studies to evaluate the barriers to screening compliance may help optimize utilization.

A Breast Radiology Department-operated, Proactive Same-day Program Identifies Pathogenic Breast Cancer Mutations in Unaffected Women

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Pathogenic mutations in some genes elevate women's breast cancer risk, necessitating risk-reduction strategies. Unfortunately, women are underscreened for cancer risk, and when identified as potentially high risk, women seldom pursue genetic counseling or testing. To improve cancer risk management, this project determined the feasibility of radiology-operated, proactive, same-day risk assessment and genetic testing programs to diagnose high-risk women undergoing breast imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Comprehensive Assessment, Risk & Education Program launched on June 5, 2019. Data was tracked through July 22, 2020. Women undergoing breast imaging completed questionnaires that calculated Tyrer-Cuzick risk and assessed genetic testing eligibility using National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria. To encourage eligible women's genetic testing adherence, pretest counseling and saliva sample collection occurred that same day in the imaging center. Samples were tested by a 34-multigene panel. Genetic counselors called women with positive results. Women with negative results or variants of uncertain significance were mailed notifications. Summary statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 3345 women completed questionnaires. 1080 (32.3%) met genetic testing criteria. 468/1080 (43.3%) submitted genetic samples, and 416/1080 (38.5%) completed testing. Of 416 completed tests, 269 (64.7%) tested negative, 109 (26.2%) had variants of uncertain significance, and 38 (9.1%) diagnosed pathogenic mutations. 13/38 (34.2%) women with pathogenic mutations implemented risk-reduction strategies at our institution.

CONCLUSION

Breast imaging centers can operate same-day cancer risk assessment and genetic testing programs, identifying high-risk women that conventional risk assessment methods may not have diagnosed. These proactive programs add value to radiology departments' cancer care beyond traditional imaging services.

Cost-Sharing and Out-of-Pocket Cost for Women Who Received MRI for Breast Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

The financial protection of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) prevention provision doesn't apply to breast MRI but only to mammography for breast cancer screening. The purpose of the study is to examine the financial burden among women who received breast MRI for screening.

METHODS

This observational study used the Marketscan® database. Women underwent breast MRI between 2009 and 2017 and had screening mammography within 6 months of the MRI were included. We compared the time trend of the proportion of zero cost-share for women undergoing screening mammography and that for MRI. We quantified out-of-pocket (OOP) costs as the sum of copayment, coinsurance, and deductible and defined zero cost-share as having no OOP cost. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and two-part model to examine factors associated with zero cost-share and OOP costs of MRI, respectively.

RESULTS

16,341 women had a screening breast MRI during the study period. The proportion of screening MRI claims with zero cost-share decreased from 43.1% (2009) to 26.2% (2017). The adjusted mean OOP cost for women in high-deductible plans was more than twice the cost for their counterparts ($549 vs. $251, 2-sided P < .001). Women who resided in the South in the post-ACA era were less likely to have zero cost-share and paid higher OOP costs for screening MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Many women are subject to high financial burden when receiving MRI for breast cancer screening. Those enrolled in high-deductible plans and who reside in the South are especially vulnerable financially.