Evaluating wait times from screening to breast cancer diagnosis among women undergoing organised assessment vs usual care

Latent pathway-based Bayesian models to identify intervenable factors of racial disparities in breast cancer stage at diagnosis

PURPOSE

We built Bayesian Network (BN) models to explain roles of different patient-specific factors affecting racial differences in breast cancer stage at diagnosis, and to identify healthcare related factors that can be intervened to reduce racial health disparities.

METHODS

We studied women age 67-74 with initial diagnosis of breast cancer during 2006-2014 in the National Cancer Institute's SEER-Medicare dataset. Our models included four measured variables (tumor grade, hormone receptor status, screening utilization and biopsy delay) expressed through two latent pathways-a tumor biology path, and health-care access/utilization path. We used various Bayesian model assessment tools to evaluate these two latent pathways as well as each of the four measured variables in explaining racial disparities in stage-at-diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among 3,010 Black non-Hispanic (NH) and 30,310 White NH breast cancer patients, respectively 70.2% vs 76.9% were initially diagnosed at local stage, 25.3% vs 20.3% with regional stage, and 4.56% vs 2.80% with distant stage-at-diagnosis. Overall, BN performed approximately 4.7 times better than Classification And Regression Tree (CART) (Breiman L, Friedman JH, Stone CJ, Olshen RA. Classification and regression trees. CRC press; 1984) in predicting stage-at-diagnosis. The utilization of screening mammography is the most prominent contributor to the accuracy of the BN model. Hormone receptor (HR) status and tumor grade are useful for explaining racial disparity in stage-at diagnosis, while log-delay in biopsy impeded good prediction.

CONCLUSIONS

Mammography utilization had a significant effect on racial differences in breast cancer stage-at-diagnosis, while tumor biology factors had less impact. Biopsy delay also aided in predicting local and regional stages-at-diagnosis for Black NH women but not for white NH women.

The impact of nurse navigation on timeliness to treatment for benign high-risk breast pathology

PURPOSE

High-risk breast pathology is a breast cancer risk factor for which timely treatment is crucial. Nurse navigation programs have been implemented to minimize delays in patient care. This study evaluated nurse navigation in terms of timeliness to surgery for patients with high-risk breast pathology.

METHODS

This was a single-institution, retrospective review of patients with identified high-risk breast pathology undergoing lumpectomy between January 2017 and June 2019. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on periods with and without nurse navigation. Preoperative and postoperative time to care as well as demographic and tumor characteristics were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

100 patients had assigned nurse navigators and 29 patients did not. Nurse navigation was associated with reduced time from referral to date of surgery (DOS) by 16.9 days (p = 0.003). Patients > 75 years had a shorter time to first appointment (p = 0.03), and patients with Medicare insurance had a reduced time from referral to DOS (p = 0.005). 20% of all patients were upstaged to cancer on final surgical pathology.

CONCLUSION

Nurse navigation was significantly associated with decreased time to care for patients with high-risk breast pathology undergoing lumpectomy. We recommend nurse navigation programs as part of a comprehensive approach for patients with high-risk breast pathology.

The journey of cancer patients and the quest to equity: findings from Morocco

OBJECTIVES

Rapid diagnostic and assessment pathways for cancer patients provide timely and effective care. This study took place in Morocco, where the majority of patients treated in the public sector are diagnosed at an advanced stage. The aim of this study was to determine the duration of different time intervals along the cancer patient pathway and to highlight problem areas so that strategies can be implemented to make the process more equitable and effective.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Recently diagnosed cancer patients were recruited from four major oncology centres in Morocco; namely, Marrakech, Casablanca, Rabat, and Fez. A questionnaire survey was administered, including sociodemographic and medical information and questions on access to the oncology centre, beliefs, and opinions on the medical staff. The dates of symptom recognition, assessment, diagnosis referral, biopsy, and treatment initiation were collected. Different time intervals (patient, diagnosis, biopsy, and treatment) were estimated and their determinants were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 812 patients were interviewed. The majority of participants were breast cancer patients. In total, 60% of participants were at stage III-IV. The main facilitators of cancer diagnosis confirmation and treatment initiation were easy access to diagnosis and treatment facilities, financial resources, personal history of cancer, time availability, late stage at diagnosis, advanced age, and private health insurance. The patient interval (i.e., time from symptom recognition to initial healthcare assessment) had a median duration of 30 days. The biopsy and treatment intervals were within the current international recommendations (7 and 28 days, respectively). However, the diagnosis interval (52 days) was twice as long as the recommended timeframes from the UK, Australia, and the World Health Organization (<28 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Interval targets should be defined to encourage health systems to be more equitable and effective and to ensure that cancer patients are treated within a defined timeframe.

The Current State of Timeliness in the Breast Cancer Diagnosis Journey: Abnormal Screening to Biopsy

There are several steps involved in a breast cancer diagnosis, starting from the initial abnormal screening mammogram. Each step from the additional imaging to a biopsy provokes anxiety. Timely attention to these appointments will not only help allay anxiety but also provide better care. While breast facilities routinely audit their performance, currently timeliness is not one of the audit parameters. The role of timeliness as a robust quality tool is gaining attention. In this study, we review the timeline of care at our facility over a 1-year period (October 2021- September 2022) and compare them with those reported by National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC). Race, ethnicity, location, and type of facility affect the outcome of care and contribute to delays in providing care. In this manuscript, we outline some of the major factors. Societal guidelines outlining some metrics for timeliness may be a useful first step.

Assurance of Timely Access to Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment by a Regional Breast Health Clinic Serving Both Urban and Rural-Remote Communities

In response to breast cancer diagnostic regional wait times exceeding both national and provincial standards and to symptomatic patient referrals for diagnostic mammography taking longer than abnormal screening mammography referrals, the Rae Fawcett Breast Health Clinic (RFBHC) was opened in 2017 in a mid-sized Canadian hospital serving both urban and rural-remote communities. We investigated whether the RFBHC improved wait times to breast cancer diagnosis, improved compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards, and decreased the wait time disparity associated with referral source. Statistical analyses of wait time differences were conducted between patients who were diagnosed with breast cancer prior to and after the RFBHC establishment. Study group compliance with national and provincial standards and wait time differences by referral source were also analysed. A survey was administered to assess overall patient experience with the RFBHC and clinic wait times. RFBHC patients had a shorter mean wait to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 45.7 days, p ≤ 0.001) and a shorter mean wait to initial breast cancer treatment (49.1 vs. 78.9 days, p ≤ 0.001) than pre-RFBHC patients. After the RFBHC establishment, patients who attended the RFBHC had a shorter mean wait time to breast cancer diagnosis (24.4 vs. 36.9 days, p = 0.005) and to initial treatment (49.1 vs. 73.1 days, p ≤ 0.001) than patients who did not attend the clinic. Compliance with national and provincial breast cancer standards improved after the RFBHC establishment and the wait time disparity between screening mammography referrals and symptomatic patient referrals decreased. Survey results indicate that the RFBHC is meeting patient expectations. We concluded that the establishment of a breast health clinic in a Canadian center serving urban and rural-remote communities improved breast diagnostic services.

Factors Associated with the Breast Cancer Diagnostic Interval across Five Canadian Provinces: A CanIMPACT Retrospective Cohort Study

The cancer diagnostic process can be protracted, and it is a time of great anxiety for patients. The objective of this study was to examine inter- and intra-provincial variation in diagnostic intervals and explore factors related to the variation. This was a multi-province retrospective cohort study using linked administrative health databases. All females with a diagnosis of histologically confirmed invasive breast cancer in British Columbia (2007-2010), Manitoba (2007-2011), Ontario (2007-2010), Nova Scotia (2007-2012), and Alberta (2004-2010) were included. The start of the diagnostic interval was determined using algorithms specific to whether the patient's cancer was detected through screening. We used multivariable quantile regression analyses to assess the association between demographic, clinical and healthcare utilization factors with the diagnostic interval outcome. We found significant inter- and intra-provincial variation in the breast cancer diagnostic interval and by screen-detection status; patients who presented symptomatically had longer intervals than screen-detected patients. Interprovincial diagnostic interval variation was 17 and 16 days for screen- and symptom-detected patients, respectively, at the median, and 14 and 41 days, respectively, at the 90th percentile. There was an association of longer diagnostic intervals with increasing comorbid disease in all provinces in non-screen-detected patients but not screen-detected. Longer intervals were observed across most provinces in screen-detected patients living in rural areas. Having a regular primary care provider was not associated with a shorter diagnostic interval. Our results highlight important findings regarding the length of the breast cancer diagnostic interval, its variation within and across provinces, and its association with comorbid disease and rurality. We conclude that diagnostic processes can be context specific, and more attention should be paid to developing tailored processes so that equitable access to a timely diagnosis can be achieved.

Radiomic Features Applied to Contrast Enhancement Spectral Mammography: Possibility to Predict Breast Cancer Molecular Subtypes in a Non-Invasive Manner

We aimed to investigate the association between the radiomic features of contrast-enhanced spectral mammography (CESM) images and a specific receptor pattern of breast neoplasms. In this single-center retrospective study, we selected patients with neoplastic breast lesions who underwent CESM before a biopsy and surgical assessment between January 2013 and February 2022. Radiomic analysis was performed on regions of interest selected from recombined CESM images. The association between the features and each evaluated endpoint (ER, PR, Ki-67, HER2+, triple negative, G2-G3 expressions) was investigated through univariate logistic regression. Among the significant and highly correlated radiomic features, we selected only the one most associated with the endpoint. From a group of 321 patients, we enrolled 205 malignant breast lesions. The median age at the exam was 50 years (interquartile range (IQR) 45-58). NGLDM_Contrast was the only feature that was positively associated with both ER and PR expression (p-values = 0.01). NGLDM_Coarseness was negatively associated with Ki-67 expression (p-value = 0.02). Five features SHAPE Volume(mL), SHAPE_Volume(vx), GLRLM_RLNU, NGLDM_Busyness and GLZLM_GLNU were all positively and significantly associated with HER2+; however, all of them were highly correlated. Radiomic features of CESM images could be helpful to predict particular molecular subtypes before a biopsy.

Return on Investment of a Breast Cancer Screening Program in Tanzania: Opportunity for Patient and Public Education

Breast cancer is the second incident and second cause of cancer mortality among women in Tanzania due to late-stage presentation. The screening clinic at the Ocean Road Cancer Institute (ORCI) can help detect cases early and reduce cost of treatment. We calculated the return on investment (ROI) of the ORCI breast screening clinic. Screening and treatment data of all newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seen at ORCI during 2016-2018 were abstracted from the medical records. Also, data on time, resources, and cost of screening and treatment were obtained. The cost of treating screened patients was compared with cost of treating unscreened patients, and differences in cost of treatment were compared with cost of operating the screening program. Of the 730 total patients, 58 were screened prior to treatment, and 672 were not. There was no significant difference between stage at diagnosis and treatments received by screened and unscreened patients (79.3% late- stage vs 72.2% late-stage diagnosis, respectively (p = .531), or cost of treatment between the two groups (cost, in Tanzanian Shillings, for screened (2,167,155.14 or $954.27) vs unscreened (1,918,592.28 or $844.52), (p = .355). There was also no significant difference in cost of treatment between the screened and unscreened groups and a slightly negative ROI (- 0.05%) from implementing the program. The breast screening clinic in Tanzania has not yet proven its cost-effectiveness in reducing stage with screening. The likelihood that patients have utilized the clinic for treatment rather than early detection is a possible reason for the lack of cost-effectiveness. Future studies should focus on educational initiatives to encourage screening at early disease stage. Public education should increase awareness about the clinic for early detection. The experience of this program is ideal for dissemination to other low-income countries that are initiating cancer early detection and cancer education programs.

Differences in breast cancer diagnosis by patient presentation in Ontario: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

In Ontario, patients with breast cancer typically receive their diagnoses through the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) after an abnormal screen, through screening initiated by a primary care provider or other referring physician, or through follow-up of symptoms by patients' primary care providers. We sought to explore the association of the route to diagnosis (screening within or outside the OBSP or via symptomatic presentation) with use of OBSP-affiliated breast assessment sites (O-BAS), wait times until diagnosis or treatment, health care use and overall survival for patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we used the Ontario Cancer Registry to identify adults (aged 18-105 yr) who received a diagnosis of breast cancer from 2013 to 2017. We excluded patients if they were not Ontario residents or had missing age or sex, or who died before diagnosis. We used logistic regression to evaluate factors associated with categorical variables (whether patients were or were not referred to an OBAS, whether patients were screened or symptomatic) and Cox proportional hazards regression to identify factors associated with all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Of 51 460 patients with breast cancer, 42 598 (83%) received their diagnoses at an O-BAS. Patients whose cancer was first detected through the OBSP were more likely than symptomatic patients to be given a diagnosis at an O-BAS (adjusted odds ratio 1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.57 to 1.80). Patients screened by the OBSP were given their diagnoses 1 month earlier than symptomatic patients, but diagnosis at an O-BAS did not affect the time until either diagnosis or treatment. Patients referred to an O-BAS had significantly better overall survival than those who were not referred (adjusted hazard ratio 0.73, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.80).

INTERPRETATION

Patients screened through the OBSP were given their diagnoses earlier than symptomatic patients and were more likely to be referred to an O-BAS, which was associated with better survival. Our findings suggest that individuals with signs and symptoms of breast cancer would benefit from similar referral processes, oversight and standards to those used by the OBSP.

The effect of multimedia health education on pain and anxiety in women undergoing mammography in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in Taiwan. However, the discomfort of receiving mammograms reduces the willingness to screen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study using a quasi-experimental design and recruited 150 participants in a medical center, Taiwan. In the control group, only provided traditional health education sheets, the experimental group has joined the intervention of multimedia health education. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and Visual Analogue Scale, respectively, were used to compare the differences in anxiety and pain between the two groups before and after receiving mammography.

RESULTS

After the intervention, the experimental group's state anxiety score was significantly lower than that of the control group (30.63 ± 8.43 vs. 33.77 ± 10.74, p < .05). However, there was no significant difference in pain scores (4.13 ± 2.37 vs. 4.57 ± 2.31; p = .25).

CONCLUSIONS

Younger, prior experience with mammography, and high trait anxiety affect pain and state anxiety of women undergoing mammography. The multimedia health education intervention could reduce anxiety effectively, but it does not significantly relieve the pain undergoing mammography.

Radiologists' Increasing Role in Population Health Management: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Population health management (PHM) is the holistic process of improving health outcomes of groups of individuals through the support of appropriate financial and care models. Radiologists' presence at the intersection of many aspects of healthcare, including screening, diagnostic imaging, and image-guided therapies, provides significant opportunity for increased radiologist engagement in PHM. Further, innovations in artificial intelligence and imaging informatics will serve as critical tools to improve value in healthcare through evidence-based and equitable approaches. Given radiologists' limited engagement in PHM to date, it is imperative to define the specialty's PHM priorities so that the radiologists' full value in improving population health is realized. In this expert review, we explore programs and future directions for radiology in PHM.

Diagnostic interval for non-screening patients undergoing mammography during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a temporary cessation of mammography screening. However, in some facilities, diagnostic breast imaging services continued for patients with a high clinical suspicion of breast cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate changes in the diagnostic interval (DI) of non-screening patients presenting for diagnostic mammography during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

Retrospective chart review was performed on patients presenting for non-screening diagnostic mammography from April 1 to June 30, 2020 (pandemic group) and April 1 to June 30, 2019 (pre-pandemic group). Age, reason for referral, number and type of imaging studies/biopsies necessary for a final diagnosis were recorded. Diagnostic interval (DI) was defined as the number of days from the date of the diagnostic mammogram to the date of the final diagnosis.

Results

Compared to the pre-pandemic group (n = 64), the pandemic group (n = 77) showed a reduction in DI of the entire cohort (pandemic: 1 day; pre-pandemic: 15 days, p < 0.0001) for patients not requiring tissue sampling (pandemic: 1 day; pre-pandemic: 11 days, .p < 0.0001) and those requiring tissue sampling with benign pathology (pandemic 9 days; pre-pandemic, 33 days, p = 0.0002). A higher percentage of patients in the pandemic group had their assessment completed during the initial visit (pandemic: 50.6%; pre-pandemic: 23.4%, p = 0.0009).

Conclusion

During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, the DI for patients with non-screening-related diagnostic mammography was significantly shorter, with a higher percentage of patients completing their assessments on the initial visit, compared to one year prior.

Key Points

• Despite reductions in manpower and clinical services, during pandemic times, it is possible to maintain a diagnostic breast imaging service for women at high clinical suspicion for breast cancer.

• During pandemic times, breast imaging departments should consider restructuring to a Rapid Diagnostic Unit model with a navigation team that follows patients through the assessment process to a final diagnosis.

• Departmental restructuring and patient navigation during pandemic times could either maintain or shorten the diagnostic interval for patients presenting for diagnostic mammography.

Factors influencing the delivery of cancer pathways: a summary of the literature

PURPOSE

The study aims to summarise the literature on cancer care pathways at the diagnostic and treatment phases. The objectives are to find factors influencing the delivery of cancer care pathways; to highlight any interrelating factors; to find gaps in the literature concerning areas of research; to summarise the strategies and recommendations implemented in the studies.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The study used a qualitative approach and developed a causal loop diagram to summarise the current literature on cancer care pathways, from screening and diagnosis to treatment. A total of 46 papers was finally included in the analysis, which highlights the recurring themes in the literature.

FINDINGS

The study highlights the myriad areas of research applied to cancer care pathways. Factors influencing the delivery of cancer care pathways were classified into different albeit interrelated themes. These include access barriers to care, hospital emergency admissions, fast track diagnostics, delay in diagnosis, waiting time to treatment and strategies to increase system efficiency.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

As far as the authors know, this is the first study to present a visual representation of the complex relationship between factors influencing the delivery of cancer care pathways.

Breast cancer diagnosis and treatment wait times in specialized diagnostic units compared with usual care: a population-based study

Background

Breast assessment sites (bass) were developed to provide expedited and coordinated care for patients being evaluated for breast cancer (bca) in Ontario. We compared the diagnostic and treatment intervals for patients diagnosed at a bas and for those diagnosed through a usual care (uc) route.

Methods

This population-based, cross-sectional study of patients diagnosed with bca in Ontario during 2007-2015 used linked administrative data. "Diagnostic interval" was the time from the earliest cancer-related health care encounter before diagnosis to diagnosis; "treatment interval" was the time from diagnosis to treatment. Diagnosis at a bas was determined from the patient's biopsy and mammography institutions. Interval lengths for the bas and uc groups were compared using multivariable quantile regression, stratified by detection method.

Results

The diagnostic interval was shorter for patients who were bas-diagnosed than for those who were uc-diagnosed, with adjusted median differences of -4.0 days [95% confidence interval (ci): -3.2 days to -4.9 days] for symptomatic patients and -5.4 days (95% ci: -4.7 days to -6.1 days) for screen-detected patients. That association was modified by stage at diagnosis, with larger differences in patients with early-stage cancers. In contrast, the treatment interval was longer in patients who were bas-diagnosed than in those who were uc-diagnosed, with adjusted median differences of 4.2 days (95% ci: 3.8 days to 4.7 days) for symptomatic patients and 4.2 days (95% ci: 3.7 days to 4.8 days) for screen-detected patients.

Conclusions

Diagnosis of bca through a bas was associated with a shorter diagnostic interval, but a longer treatment interval. Although efficiencies in the diagnostic interval might help to reduce distress experienced by patients, the longer treatment intervals for patients who are bas-diagnosed remain a cause for concern.

Delayed breast cancer diagnosis after repeated recall at biennial screening mammography: an observational follow-up study from the Netherlands

Background

Delay in detection of breast cancer may worsen tumour characteristics, with progression of tumour size and a higher risk of metastatic lymph nodes. The purpose of this study was to investigate delayed breast cancer diagnosis after repeated recall for the same mammographic abnormality at screening.

Methods

This was a retrospective study performed in two cohorts of women enrolled in a mammography screening programme in the Netherlands. All women aged 50−75 who underwent biennial screening mammography either between January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2006 (cohort 1) or between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016 (cohort 2) were included.

Results

The cohorts showed no difference in proportions of women with delayed breast cancer diagnosis of at least 2 years (2.2% versus 2.8%, P = 0.29). Most delays were caused by incorrect BI-RADS classifications after recall (74.2%). An increase in mean tumour size was seen when comparing sizes at initial false-negative recall and at diagnosis of breast cancer (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The proportion of women with a long delay in breast cancer confirmation following repeated recall at screening mammography has not decreased during 20 years of screening. These delays lead to larger tumour size at detection and may negatively influence prognosis.

Comparison of wait times across the breast cancer treatment pathway among screened women undergoing organized breast assessment versus usual care

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of organized breast assessment on wait times to treatment among asymptomatic women is unknown. The Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) offers screening and organized assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BAC). This study compares wait times across the treatment pathway among screened women diagnosed with breast cancer through BAC and usual care (UC).

METHODS

A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of postmenopausal women aged 50-69 within the OBSP diagnosed with screen-detected invasive breast cancer and assessed in BAC (n = 2010) and UC (n = 1844) between 2002 and 2010. Demographic characteristics were obtained from the OBSP. Medical chart abstraction provided prognostic and treatment data. Multinomial logistic regression examined associations of assessment type with wait times from abnormal mammogram to surgery, chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

RESULTS

Compared with through UC, postmenopausal women diagnosed through BAC were significantly less likely to have longer wait times (days) from an abnormal mammogram to definitive surgery (> 89 vs. ≤ 47; OR = 0.63; 95% CI = 0.52-0.77), from final surgery to radiotherapy (> 88 vs. ≤ 55; OR = 0.71; 95% CI = 0.54-0.93) and from final chemotherapy to radiotherapy (> 41 vs. ≤ 28; OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.36-0.76). Conversely, women assessed through BAC compared with through UC were more likely to experience longer wait times from final surgery to chemotherapy (> 64 vs. ≤ 40; OR = 1.49; 95% CI = 1.04-2.14).

CONCLUSION

Shorter wait times to most treatments for postmenopausal women diagnosed in BAC further supports that women with an abnormal mammogram should be managed through organized assessment. Continued evaluation of factors influencing wait times to treatment is essential for quality improvement and patient outcomes.

Improving Wait Times and Patient Experience Through Implementation of a Provincial Expedited Diagnostic Pathway for BI-RADS 5 Breast Lesions

BACKGROUND

Long diagnostic intervals following abnormal breast imaging (DI) cause patient anxiety and possibly poorer prognosis. This study evaluates the effect of a provincial diagnostic pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions on wait times and the patient-reported experience (PRE).

METHODS

With multidisciplinary input, we developed a pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions featuring expedited biopsy, early surgical referral, and nurse (RN) navigator support. Key diagnostic intervals were captured prospectively and compared with a prepathway control cohort. PRE data were obtained from a voluntary survey.

RESULTS

1205 patients were managed on the BI-RADS 5 pathway with 797 primary care physicians, 57 imaging centers, and 2 regional breast programs participating. Median duration from DI to biopsy was 6 days, from biopsy to pathology report was 5 days, DI to surgical referral was 6 days, and DI to surgical consult was 21 days. Compared with 128 prepathway controls, median intervals from DI to surgical referral and consult were significantly improved (15 vs. 6 days, 26 vs. 21 days, p < 0.001). Amongst 294 women who completed the survey, 92% experienced ≥ 1 anxiety complaint during assessment; prompt surgical consultation and multiple features of RN support reduced anxiety, and wait time satisfaction was high (70%). Patient preferences varied for receiving biopsy results from a surgeon (57%) vs. another provider (43%).

CONCLUSIONS

A diagnostic pathway for BI-RADS 5 lesions reduced wait times and improved the patient experience through prompt surgical referral and RN navigator support. Differing preferences for receiving biopsy results emerged, and future iterations should incorporate individualized patient wishes.

[Systematic second opinion review of outside imaging in breast cancer diagnosis: An added value]

INTRODUCTION

The systematic second opinion review in cancer centers after breast cancer detection is currently under development. The purposes were the evaluation of review's consequences, in particularly of the axillary staging and the evolution of the delays.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients who consulted a clinician at Cancer Center of Lorraine in Nancy from January 1st, 2016 to December 31th, 2016. We analyzed from their medical charts: the outside exams, the initial therapeutic plan, the second opinion review, the additional exams, the multidisciplinary consultation conclusions, the first treatment, the multidisciplinary consultation after surgery.

RESULTS

In all, 251 patients were analyzed. Second opinion review discrepancies were seen in 72.5%. As a result, 43.4% of all patients had new breast-axillary biopsies. New malignancies lesions were identified in 19.9% of patients. Modifications in therapeutic plan were recommended in 19.9% of patients (including patients with and without new malignancies lesions diagnosed). Before a second opinion review, 9.8% of axillary ultrasound lead to a positive fine-needle biopsy. The additional exams identified 9.6% additional lesions. After a positive sentinel lymph node excision biopsy, the multidisciplinary consultation recommended a revision surgery of axillary lymph node dissection for 27% of patients with axillary ultrasound performed in our cancer center, and for 70% of patients without ultrasound (P=0.023).

DISCUSSION

The systematic second opinion at cancer center allows the detection of new malignancies lesions and significant modifications in the therapeutic plan. A systematic evaluation of axillary ultrasound in cancer center could be considered.

The impact of organized breast assessment on survival by stage for screened women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer

PURPOSE

Since 1998, the Ontario Breast Screening Program (OBSP) has offered organized assessment through Breast Assessment Centres (BAC). This study compares survival between screened women diagnosed with breast cancer who have undergone assessment through a BAC and usual care (UC).

METHODS

A retrospective design identified two concurrent cohorts of women aged 50 to 69 within the OBSP diagnosed with screen-detected invasive breast cancer at a BAC (n = 2010) and UC (n = 1844) between 2002 and 2010 and followed until 2016. Demographic and assessment characteristics were obtained from the OBSP. Abstraction of medical charts provided prognostic and treatment data. Death data were assessed from the Registered Person's Database and the Ontario Registrar General All-Cause Mortality File. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models compared overall survival by assessment type (BAC/UC), stratified by stage.

RESULTS

There were 505 deaths during the study (BAC = 239; UC = 266). Among women with stage I screen-detected breast cancer, those diagnosed through a BAC had 31% reduced risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.53-0.90) compared to UC. Diagnosis within 7 weeks of an abnormal mammogram reduced the hazard of death from all causes by 34% among all women with stage I breast cancers (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.47-0.91), and was more likely in BAC (79.7%) than UC (66.9%).

CONCLUSION

The significant improvement in overall survival for women with stage I screen-detected invasive breast cancer assessed through BACs further supports the recommendation that women with abnormal mammograms should be managed through organized assessment.

Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society.