Recurrence of severe diverticulitis is associated with age and birth decade

BACKGROUND

The risk of recurrence is an important consideration when deciding to treat patients medically or with elective colectomy after recovery from diverticulitis. It is unclear whether age is associated with recurrence. This study aimed to examine the relationship between age and the risk of recurrent diverticulitis while considering important epidemiologic factors, such as birth decade.

METHODS

The Utah Population Database was used to identify individuals with incident severe diverticulitis, defined as requiring an emergency department visit or hospitalization, between 1998 and 2018. This study measured the relationship between age and recurrent severe diverticulitis after adjusting for birth decade and other important variables, such as sex, urban/rural status, complicated diverticulitis, and body mass index using a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

The cohort included 8606 individuals with a median age of 61 years at index diverticulitis diagnosis. After adjustment, among individuals born in the same birth decade, increasing age at diverticulitis onset was associated with an increased risk of recurrent diverticulitis (hazard ratio [HR] for 10 years, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.1). Among individuals with the same age of onset, those born in a more recent birth decade were also at greater risk of recurrent diverticulitis (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6-2.3).

CONCLUSION

Among individuals with an index episode of severe diverticulitis, recurrence was associated with increasing age and more recent birth decade. Clinicians may wish to employ age-specific strategies when counseling patients regarding treatment options after a diverticulitis diagnosis.

Parents' Psychological and Decision-Making Outcomes following Prenatal Diagnosis with Complex Congenital Heart Defect: An Exploratory Study

Background. Parents with a fetus diagnosed with a complex congenital heart defect (CHD) are at high risk of negative psychological outcomes. Purpose. To explore whether parents' psychological and decision-making outcomes differed based on their treatment decision and fetus/neonate survival status. Methods. We prospectively enrolled parents with a fetus diagnosed with a complex, life-threatening CHD from September 2018 to December 2020. We tested whether parents' psychological and decision-making outcomes 3 months posttreatment differed by treatment choice and survival status. Results. Our sample included 23 parents (average Age[years]: 27 ± 4, range = 21-37). Most were women (n = 18), non-Hispanic White (n = 20), and married (n = 21). Most parents chose surgery (n = 16), with 11 children surviving to the time of the survey; remaining parents (n = 7) chose comfort-directed care. Parents who chose comfort-directed care reported higher distress (x ¯  = 1.51, s = 0.75 v. x ¯  = 0.74, s = 0.55; Mdifference = 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.05-1.48) and perinatal grief (x ¯  = 91.86, s = 22.96 v. x ¯  = 63.38, s = 20.15; Mdifference = 27.18, 95% CI, 6.20-48.16) than parents who chose surgery, regardless of survival status. Parents who chose comfort-directed care reported higher depression (x ¯  = 1.64, s = 0.95 v. x ¯  = 0.65, s = 0.49; Mdifference = 0.99, 95% CI, 0.10-1.88) than parents whose child survived following surgery. Parents choosing comfort-directed care reported higher regret (x ¯  = 26.43, s = 8.02 v. x ¯  = 5.00, s = 7.07; Mdifference = 21.43, 95% CI, 11.59-31.27) and decisional conflict (x ¯  = 20.98, s = 10.00 v. x ¯  = 3.44, s = 4.74; Mdifference = 17.54, 95% CI; 7.75-27.34) than parents whose child had not survived following surgery. Parents whose child survived following surgery reported lower grief (Mdifference = -19.71; 95% CI, -39.41 to -0.01) than parents whose child had not. Conclusions. The results highlight the potential for interventions and care tailored to parents' treatment decisions and outcomes to support parental coping and well-being.

Highlights

Question: Do the psychological and decision-making outcomes of parents differ based on their treatment decision and survival outcome following prenatal diagnosis with complex CHD?Findings: In this exploratory study, parents who decided to pursue comfort-directed care after a prenatal diagnosis reported higher levels of psychological distress and grief as well as higher decisional conflict and regret than parents who decided to pursue surgery.Meaning: The findings from this exploratory study highlight potential differences in parents' psychological and decision-making outcomes following a diagnosis of complex CHD for their fetus, which appear to relate to the treatment approach and the treatment outcome and may require tailoring of psychological and decision support.

Parents' quality of life and health after treatment decision for a fetus with severe congenital heart defect

PURPOSE

This exploratory study examines differences in parents' quality of life by treatment decision and the child's survival outcome in the context of life-threatening congenital heart disease (CHD).

DESIGN AND METHODS

Parents of a fetus or neonate diagnosed with severe CHD enrolled in the observational control group of a clinical trial (NCT04437069) and completed quality of life (i.e., contact with clinicians, social support, partner relationship, state of mind), mental and physical health survey measures. Comparisons were made between parents who chose comfort-directed care or surgery and between those whose child did and did not survive.

RESULTS

Parents who chose surgery and their child did not survive reported the most contact with their clinicians. Parents who chose comfort-directed care reported lower social support than parents who chose surgery and their child did not survive as well as poorer state of mind compared to parents who chose surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Some aspects of parents' quality of life differed based on their treatment decision. Parents who choose comfort-directed care are vulnerable to some negative outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Decision support tools and bereavement resources to assist parents with making and coping with a complex treatment decision is important for clinical care.

Development of Complementary Encounter and Patient Decision Aids for Shared Decision Making about Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation

Introduction

Decision aids (DAs) are helpful instruments used to support shared decision making (SDM). Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) face complex decisions regarding stroke prevention strategies. While a few DAs have been made for AF stroke prevention, an encounter DA (EDA) and patient DA (PDA) have not been created to be used in conjunction with each other before.

Design

Using iterative user-centered design, we developed 2 DAs for anticoagulation choice and stroke prevention in AF. Prototypes were created, and we elicited feedback from patients and experts via observations of encounters, usability testing, and semistructured interviews.

Results

User testing was done with 33 experts (in AF and SDM) and 51 patients from 6 institutions. The EDA and PDA underwent 1 and 4 major iterations, respectively. Major differences between the DAs included AF pathophysiology and a preparation to meet with the clinician in the PDA as well as different language throughout. Content areas included personalized stroke risk, differences between anticoagulants, and risks of bleeding. Based on user feedback, developers 1) addressed feelings of isolation with AF, 2) improved navigation options, 3) modified content and flow for users new to AF and those experienced with AF, 4) updated stroke risk pictographs, and 5) added structure to the preparation for decision making in the PDA.

Limitations

These DAs focus only on anticoagulation for stroke prevention and are online, which may limit participation for those less comfortable with technology.

Conclusions

Designing complementary DAs for use in tandem or separately is a new method to support SDM between patients and clinicians. Extensive user testing is essential to creating high-quality tools that best meet the needs of those using them.

Highlights

First-time complementary encounter and patient decision aids have been designed to work together or separately.User feedback led to greater structure and different experiences for patients naïve or experienced with anticoagulants in patient decision aids.Online tools allow for easier dissemination, use in telehealth visits, and updating as new evidence comes out.

Study protocol for a randomised clinical trial of a decision aid and values clarification method for parents of a fetus or neonate diagnosed with a life-threatening congenital heart defect

INTRODUCTION

Parents who receive the diagnosis of a life-threatening, complex heart defect in their fetus or neonate face a difficult choice between pursuing termination (for fetal diagnoses), palliative care or complex surgical interventions. Shared decision making (SDM) is recommended in clinical contexts where there is clinical equipoise. SDM can be facilitated by decision aids. The International Patient Decision Aids Standards collaboration recommends the inclusion of values clarification methods (VCMs), yet little evidence exists concerning the incremental impact of VCMs on patient or surrogate decision making. This protocol describes a randomised clinical trial to evaluate the effect of a decision aid (with and without a VCM) on parental mental health and decision making within a clinical encounter.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Parents who have a fetus or neonate diagnosed with one of six complex congenital heart defects at a single tertiary centre will be recruited. Data collection for the prospective observational control group was conducted September 2018 to December 2020 (N=35) and data collection for two intervention groups is ongoing (began October 2020). At least 100 participants will be randomised 1:1 to two intervention groups (decision aid only vs decision aid with VCM). For the intervention groups, data will be collected at four time points: (1) at diagnosis, (2) postreceipt of decision aid, (3) postdecision and (4) 3 months postdecision. Data collection for the control group was the same, except they did not receive a survey at time 2. Linear mixed effects models will assess differences between study arms in distress (primary outcome), grief and decision quality (secondary outcomes) at 3-month post-treatment decision.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the University of Utah Institutional Review Board. Study findings have and will continue to be presented at national conferences and within scientific research journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04437069 (Pre-results).

Provider insights on shared decision-making with families affected by CHD

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Little data exist on provider perspectives about counselling and shared decision-making for complex CHD, ways to support and improve the process, and barriers to effective communication. The goal of this qualitative study was to determine providers' perspectives regarding factors that are integral to shared decision-making with parents faced with complex CHD in their fetus or newborn; and barriers and facilitators to engaging in effective shared decision-making.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with providers from different areas of practice who care for fetuses and/or children with CHD. Providers were recruited from four geographically diverse centres. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed for key themes using an open coding process with a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

Interviews were conducted with 31 providers; paediatric cardiologists (n = 7) were the largest group represented, followed by nurses (n = 6) and palliative care providers (n = 5). Key barriers to communication with parents that providers identified included variability among providers themselves, factors that influenced parental comprehension or understanding, discrepant expectations, circumstantial barriers, and trust/relationship with providers. When discussing informational needs of parents, providers focused on comprehensive short- and long-term outcomes, quality of life, and breadth and depth that aligned with parental goals and needs. In discussing resources to support shared decision-making, providers emphasised the need for comprehensive, up-to-date information that was accessible to parents of varying situations and backgrounds.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider perspectives on decision-making with families with CHD highlighted key communication issues, informational priorities, and components of decision support that can enhance shared decision-making.

Ileostomy or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: patient participation and decisional needs

BACKGROUND

Up to 30% of patients with ulcerative colitis will undergo surgery resulting in an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) or permanent end ileostomy (EI). We aimed to understand how patients decide between these two options.

METHODS

We performed semi-structured interviews with ulcerative colitis patients who underwent surgery. Areas of questioning included the degree to which patients participated in decision-making, challenges experienced, and suggestions for improving the decision-making process. We analyzed the data using a directed content and thematic approach.

RESULTS

We interviewed 16 patients ranging in age from 28 to 68 years. Nine were male, 10 underwent IPAA, and 6 underwent EI. When it came to participation in decision-making, 11 patients felt independently responsible for decision-making, 3 shared decision-making with the surgeon, and 2 experienced surgeon-led decision-making. Themes regarding challenges during decision-making included lack of support from family, lack of time to discuss options with the surgeon, and the overwhelming complexity of the decision. Themes for ways to improve decision-making included the need for additional information, the desire for peer education, and earlier consultation with a surgeon. Only 3 patients were content with the information used to decide about surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ulcerative colitis who need surgery largely experience independence when deciding between IPAA and EI, but struggle with inadequate educational information and social support. Patients may benefit from early access to surgeons and peer guidance to enhance independence in decision-making. Preoperative educational materials describing surgical complications and postoperative lifestyle could improve decision-making and facilitate discussions with loved ones.

Persistent effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on diet, exercise, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life: A longitudinal study among U.S. adults

COVID-19 has affected the health and well-being of almost every American. The aim of this study was to examine the sustained impacts of COVID-19 prevention measures on the diet and exercise habits, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life among adults in the U.S. We conducted a longitudinal study using a convenience sample of participants recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform between March 30 and April 7, 2020, and 8 months into the outbreak, from November 2 to November 21, 2020. We compared self-reported diet and exercise habits and risk for food insecurity shortly after the pandemic began, in April, to those reported in November. We also measured changes in quality-of-life using the PROMIS-29 + 2 (PROPr) scale. A total of 636 respondents completed both surveys. Compared to reports in April, respondents ate lunch and dinner out more frequently in November and consumed more take-out and fast food. Weekly frequencies of consuming frozen food and the number of daily meals were slightly lower in November than they were in April. 54% of respondents screened positively for being at risk for food insecurity in April, reducing to 41% by November. In April, survey respondents were found to have lower quality-of-life relative to U.S. population norms, but by November levels of depression and cognitive function had improved. Our findings underscore how the initial effects of the pandemic on diet, exercise, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life have evolved. As U.S. states re-open, continued efforts to encourage healthy eating and support mental health, especially to reduce feelings of anxiety and social isolation, remain important to mitigate the potential long-term effects of the pandemic.

Predictors of households at risk for food insecurity in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To examine associations between sociodemographic and mental health characteristics with household risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 outbreak.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional online survey analysed using univariable tests and a multivariable logistic regression model.

SETTING

The United States during the week of 30 March 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

A convenience sample of 1965 American adults using Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform. Participants reporting household food insecurity prior to the pandemic were excluded from analyses.

RESULTS

One thousand two hundred and fifty participants reported household food security before the COVID-19 outbreak. Among this subset, 41 % were identified as at risk for food insecurity after COVID-19, 55 % were women and 73 % were white. On a multivariable analysis, race, income, relationship status, living situation, anxiety and depression were significantly associated with an incident risk for food insecurity. Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino respondents, respondents with an annual income <$100 000 and those living with children or others were significantly more likely to be newly at risk for food insecurity. Individuals at risk for food insecurity were 2·60 (95 % CI 1·91, 3·55) times more likely to screen positively for anxiety and 1·71 (95 % CI 1·21, 2·42) times more likely to screen positively for depression.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic is common, and certain populations are particularly vulnerable. There are strong associations between being at risk for food insecurity and anxiety/depression. Interventions to increase access to healthful foods, especially among minority and low-income individuals, and ease the socioemotional effects of the outbreak are crucial to relieving the economic stress of this pandemic.

Barriers and Facilitators to Enrollment and Retention in the National Diabetes Prevention Program: Perspectives of Women and Clinicians Within a Health System

Background: More than 10% of US adults are living with type 2 diabetes. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention established the National Diabetes Prevention Program (National DPP) in 2010 in an effort to delay or prevent this disease among individuals at high risk. Unfortunately, enrollment and retention rates are low. This qualitative study aims to understand barriers and facilitators to enrolling and completing the National DPP among women, and to provide recommendations for improvement.

Methods: Semistructured interviews were conducted with the following: (1) women who were eligible for the National DPP, but declined to enroll (n=11); (2) women who enrolled in the National DPP, but did not complete the program (n=12); and (3) clinicians who treat women eligible for the National DPP (n=12). Transcripts of the interviews were coded using content analysis.

Results: The 35 interviews (23 patients and 12 clinicians) provided further insight into known barriers, such as the cost of the program, the time that it takes, and inconvenient locations. The study also identified previously undiscovered barriers, including the program not meeting participants' expectations and facilitating referrals. Furthermore, improved communication between clinicians, patients, and National DPP staff could ensure that both clinicians and National DPP staff are aware of patients' goals and their individual barriers to success.

Conclusions: Enrollment and retention in the National DPP may be improved with additional communication, more training for National DPP staff to work more closely with participants, adding better incentives to participation, and making the program more accessible through flexibility in time and/or locations.

Shared Decision Making Tools for People Facing Stroke Prevention Strategies in Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Environmental Scan

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making (SDM) tools can help implement guideline recommendations for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) considering stroke prevention strategies. We sought to characterize all available SDM tools for this purpose and examine their quality and clinical impact.

METHODS

We searched through multiple bibliographic databases, social media, and an SDM tool repository from inception to May 2020 and contacted authors of identified SDM tools. Eligible tools had to offer information about warfarin and ≥1 direct oral anticoagulant. We extracted tool characteristics, assessed their adherence to the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, and obtained information about their efficacy in promoting SDM.

RESULTS

We found 14 SDM tools. Most tools provided up-to-date information about the options, but very few included practical considerations (e.g., out-of-pocket cost). Five of these SDM tools, all used by patients prior to the encounter, were tested in trials at high risk of bias and were found to produce small improvements in patient knowledge and reductions in decisional conflict.

CONCLUSION

Several SDM tools for stroke prevention in AF are available, but whether they promote high-quality SDM is yet to be known. The implementation of guidelines for SDM in this context requires user-centered development and evaluation of SDM tools that can effectively promote high-quality SDM and improve stroke prevention in patients with AF.

Factors Associated With Decision Regret Among Patients With Diverticulitis in the Elective Setting

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify decision process measures associated with patient decisional regret regarding the decision to pursue elective colectomy or observation for diverticulitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center cross-sectional survey study. We included adult patients treated for diverticulitis between 2014 and 2019 and excluded patients who required urgent or emergent colectomy. The primary outcome was regret regarding the decision to pursue elective surgery or observation for diverticulitis, measured using the Decision Regret Scale. We used multivariable linear regression to examine hypothesized predictors of decision regret, including decisional conflict (Decision Conflict Scale and its subscales), shared decision-making, and decision role concordance.

RESULTS

Of 923 eligible patients, 133 were included in the analysis. Patients had a median of five episodes of diverticulitis (interquartile range 3-8), occurring a median of 2 y (interquartile range 1-3) before survey administration. Thirty-eight patients (29%) underwent elective surgery for diverticulitis. Decision regret (Decision Regret Scale score ≥25) was present in 42 patients (32%). After controlling for surgery, gender, health status, and years since treatment, decision regret was associated with decisional conflict and inversely associated with values clarity, decision role concordance, shared decision-making, and feeling informed, supported, and effective in decision-making (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of survey respondents experienced regret regarding the decision between elective surgery and observation for diverticulitis. Decision regret may be reduced through efforts to improve patient knowledge, values clarity, role concordance, and shared decision-making.

A systematic review of intensive outpatient care programs for high-need, high-cost patients

Five percent of the patient population accounts for 50% of U.S. healthcare expenditures. High-need, high-cost patients are medically complex for numerous reasons, often including behavioral health needs. Intensive outpatient care programs (IOCPs) are emerging, innovative clinics which provide patient-centered care leveraging multidisciplinary teams. The overarching goals of IOCPs are to reduce emergency department visits and hospitalizations (and related costs), and improve care continuity and patient outcomes. The purpose of this review was to examine the effectiveness of IOCPs on multiple outcomes to inform clinical care. A systematic search of the literature was conducted to identify articles. Six studies were included that varied in rigor of research design, analysis, and measurement of outcomes. Most studies reported results on healthcare utilization (n = 4) and costs (n = 3), with fewer reporting results on patient-reported and health-related outcomes (n = 2). Overall, there were decreasing trends in emergency department visits and hospitalizations. However, results on healthcare utilization varied based on time of follow-up, with shorter follow-up times yielding more significant results. Two of the three studies that evaluated costs found significant reductions associated with IOCPs, and the third was cost-neutral. Two studies reported improvements in patient-reported outcomes (e.g., satisfaction, depression, and anxiety). Overall, these programs reported positive impacts on healthcare utilization and costs; however, few studies evaluated patient characteristics and behaviors (e.g., engagement in care) which may serve as key mechanisms of program effectiveness. Future research should examine patient characteristics, behaviors, and clinic engagement metrics to inform clinical practice.

Cost-effectiveness of consensus guideline based management of pancreatic cysts: The sensitivity and specificity required for guidelines to be cost-effective

BACKGROUND

Detection of cystic lesions of the pancreas has outpaced our ability to stratify low-grade cystic lesions from those at greater risk for pancreatic cancer, raising a concern for overtreatment.

METHODS

We developed a Markov decision model to determine the cost-effectiveness of guideline-based management for asymptomatic pancreatic cysts. Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year gained and survival were calculated for current management guidelines. A sensitivity analysis estimated the effect on cost-effectiveness and mortality if overtreatment of low-grade cysts is avoided, and the sensitivity and specificity thresholds required of methods of cyst stratification to improve costs expended.

RESULTS

"Surveillance" using current management guidelines had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $171,143/quality adjusted life year compared with no surveillance or operative treatment ("do nothing"). An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for surveillance decreases to $80,707/quality adjusted life year if the operative overtreatment of low-grade cysts was avoided. Assuming a societal willingness-to-pay of $100,000/quality adjusted life year, the diagnostic specificity for high-risk cysts must be >67% for surveillance to be preferred over surgery and "do nothing." Changes in sensitivity alone cannot make surveillance cost-effective. Most importantly, survival in surveillance is worse than "do nothing" for 3 years after cyst diagnosis, although long-term survival is improved. The disadvantage is eliminated when overtreatment of low-grade cysts is avoided.

CONCLUSION

Current management of pancreatic cystic lesions is not cost-effective and may increase mortality owing to overtreatment of low-grade cysts. The specificity for risk stratification for high-risk cysts must be greater than 67% to make surveillance cost-effective.

Patient Willingness to Accept Antibiotic Side Effects to Reduce Surgical Site Infection After Colorectal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Mechanical bowel preparation with antibiotics is associated with decreased surgical site infections (SSI) after colorectal surgery. However, antibiotics have side effects, such as vomiting. It is unknown how patient willingness to take antibiotics is affected by side effect severity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center study of 86 patients (37 undergoing colorectal surgery) using a modified standard gamble technique. We presented patients with four hypothetical scenarios, holding SSI reduction constant and varying antibiotic side effect severity. Patients reported willingness to take antibiotics using a scale from 0 to 100. Patients also reported the maximum level of side effects they would accept. We examined the association between side effect severity and willingness to take antibiotics with a multivariable mixed-effects regression model and investigated differences in surgical and nonsurgical patients.

RESULTS

After adjusting for age, sex, and patient type, willingness scores decreased with increasing side effect severity. No side effects: 92 (CI 86,99), mild: 83 (CI 76,90), moderate: 76 (CI 69,83), and severe: 46 (CI 38,52), P < 0.001. Surgical patients were more willing to take antibiotics at all severity levels compared with nonsurgical patients, P < 0.001. Surgical (57%) and nonsurgical (58%) patients reported that they would accept moderate side effects. Patients with prior SSI (n = 5) would take antibiotics regardless of side effect severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing antibiotic side effect severity is associated with decreased willingness to take antibiotics during bowel preparation, despite a reduction in SSI. Adherence may be improved with strategies that increase patient education and decrease side effects during bowel preparation.

Evaluation of the intensive outpatient clinic: study protocol for a prospective study of high-cost, high-need patients in the University of Utah Health system

INTRODUCTION

The University of Utah (UofU) Health intensive outpatient clinic (IOC) is a primary care clinic for medically complex (high-cost, high-need) patients with Medicaid. The clinic consists of a multidisciplinary care team aimed at providing coordinated, comprehensive and patient-centred care. The protocol outlines the quantitative design of an evaluation study to determine the IOC's effects on reducing healthcare utilisation and costs, as well as improving patient-reported health outcomes and quality of care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

High-risk patients, with high utilisation and multiple chronic illnesses, were identified in the Medicaid ACO population managed by the UofU Health plans for IOC eligibility. A prospective, case-control study design is being used to match 100 IOC patients to 200 control patients (receiving usual care within the UofU) based on demographics, health utilisation and medical complexity for evaluating the primary outcome of change in healthcare utilisation and costs. For the secondary outcomes of patient health and care quality, a prepost design will be used to examine within-person change across the 18 months of follow-up (ie, before and after IOC intervention). Logistic regression and hierarchical, longitudinal growth modelling are the two primary modelling approaches.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This work has received ethics approval by the UofU Institutional Review Board. Results from the evaluation of primary and secondary outcomes will be disseminated in scientific research journals and presented at national conferences.

Evaluation of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC): A patient-reported survey for genetic high-risk assessment for breast and ovarian cancers in women

Identification of mutations that increase lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancer is critical to improving women's health. Because these mutations are relatively rare in the general population, there is a need for efficient methods to identify appropriate women to undergo genetic testing. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and performance of the NCCN guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC)-a patient-facing assessment for those affected and unaffected by cancer. This study enrolled a prospective cohort of 100 affected and 100 unaffected women that used N-TRAC in a clinical setting. Recommendations for referral to genetic counseling based on N-TRAC and other standard risk assessment methods were compared.Seventy-seven of the 100 affected women and 35 of the 100 unaffected women were identified as high risk by N-TRAC. The average completion time was approximately 2 min for both groups. N-TRAC accuracy for family history was exceptional in both groups (kappa > 0.96). N-TRAC and other risk assessment methods do not always identify the same high risk population. N-TRAC is an accurate and feasible tool that can assist in identifying women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and may lead to more informed decision-making.

How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Decades of persuasive messages have reinforced the importance of traditional screening mammography at regular intervals. A potential new paradigm, risk-based screening, adjusts mammography frequency based on a woman's estimated breast cancer risk in order to maximize mortality reduction while minimizing false positives and overdiagnosis. Women's views of risk-based screening are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To explore women's views and personal acceptability of a potential risk-based mammography screening paradigm.

DESIGN

Four semi-structured focus group discussions about screening mammography and surveys before provision of information about risk-based screening. We analyzed coded focus group transcripts using a mixed deductive (content analysis) and inductive (grounded theory) approach.

PARTICIPANTS

Convenience sample of 29 women (40-74 years old) with no personal history of breast cancer recruited by print and online media in New Hampshire and Vermont.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven out of 29 women reported having undergone mammography screening. All participants were white and most were highly educated. Some women accepted the idea that early cancer detection with traditional screening was beneficial-although many also reported hearing inconsistent recommendations from clinicians and mixed messages from media reports about mammography. Some women were familiar with a risk-based screening paradigm (primarily related to cervical cancer, n = 8) and thought matching screening mammography frequency to personal risk made sense (n = 8). Personal acceptability of risk-based screening was mixed. Some believed risk-based screening could reduce the harms of false positives and overdiagnosis (n = 7). Others thought screening less often might result in missing a dangerous diagnosis (n = 14). Many (n = 18) expressed concerns about the feasibility of risk-based screening and questioned whether breast cancer risk estimates could be accurate. Some suspected that risk-based mammography was motivated by a desire to save money (n = 6).

CONCLUSION

Some women thought risk-based screening made sense. Willingness to abandon traditional screening for the new paradigm was mixed. Broad acceptability of risk-based screening will require clearer communication about its rationale and feasibility and consistent messages from the health care team.

Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Use by Breast Density and Family History of Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) among women with a new breast cancer has increased over the past decade. MRI use is more frequent in younger women and those with lobular carcinoma, but associations with breast density and family history of breast cancer are unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data for 3075 women ages >65 years with stage 0-III breast cancer who underwent breast conserving surgery or mastectomy from 2005 to 2010 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium were linked to administrative claims data to assess associations of preoperative MRI use with mammographic breast density and first-degree family history of breast cancer. Multivariable logistic regression estimated adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for the association of MRI use with breast density and family history, adjusting for woman and tumor characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, preoperative MRI use was 16.4%. The proportion of women receiving breast MRI was similar by breast density (17.6% dense, 16.9% nondense) and family history (17.1% with family history, 16.5% without family history). After adjusting for potential confounders, we found no difference in preoperative MRI use by breast density (OR = 0.95 for dense vs. nondense, 95% CI: 0.73-1.22) or family history (OR = 0.99 for family history vs. none, 95% CI: 0.73-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Among women aged >65 years with breast cancer, having dense breasts or a first-degree relative with breast cancer was not associated with greater preoperative MRI use. This utilization is in keeping with lack of evidence that MRI has higher yield of malignancy in these subgroups.

Using CollaboRATE, a brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making: Results from three clinical settings in the United States

Introduction

CollaboRATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real‐time patient survey and (ii) evaluate CollaboRATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations.

Method

All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete CollaboRATE post‐visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed‐effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the CollaboRATE score.

Results

While CollaboRATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age (OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014‐1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher CollaboRATE scores (OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073‐1.397). Clinician also predicts CollaboRATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site‐specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in‐clinic implementation and are significantly related to CollaboRATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 (OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=−2.71, 95% CI −1.114 to −0.178).

Discussion

This study demonstrates that CollaboRATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden.

Evaluating CollaboRATE in a clinical setting: analysis of mode effects on scores, response rates and costs of data collection

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM) has become a policy priority, yet its implementation is not routinely assessed. To address this gap we tested the delivery of CollaboRATE, a 3-item patient reported experience measure of SDM, via multiple survey modes.

OBJECTIVE

To assess CollaboRATE response rates and respondent characteristics across different modes of administration, impact of mode and patient characteristics on SDM performance and cost of administration per response in a real-world primary care practice.

DESIGN

Observational study design, with repeated assessment of SDM performance using CollaboRATE in a primary care clinic over 15 months of data collection. Different modes of administration were introduced sequentially including paper, patient portal, interactive voice response (IVR) call, text message and tablet computer.

PARTICIPANTS

Consecutive patients ≥18 years, or parents/guardians of patients <18 years, visiting participating primary care clinicians.

MAIN MEASURES

CollaboRATE assesses three core SDM tasks: (1) explanation about health issues, (2) elicitation of patient preferences and (3) integration of patient preferences into decisions. Responses to each item range from 0 (no effort was made) to 9 (every effort was made). CollaboRATE scores are calculated as the proportion of participants who report a score of nine on each of the three CollaboRATE questions.

KEY RESULTS

Scores were sensitive to mode effects: the paper mode had the highest average score (81%) and IVR had the lowest (61%). However, relative clinician performance rankings were stable across the different data collection modes used. Tablet computers administered by research staff had the highest response rate (41%), although this approach was costly. Clinic staff giving paper surveys to patients as they left the clinic had the lowest response rate (12%).

CONCLUSIONS

CollaboRATE can be introduced using multiple modes of survey delivery while producing consistent clinician rankings. This may allow routine assessment and benchmarking of clinician and clinic SDM performance.

Association of Regional Intensity of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treatment With Likelihood of Breast Preservation

Importance

Large regional variation exists in the use of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Although patients who do not receive initial radiotherapy for DCIS are candidates for subsequent BCS if they experience a second breast event, many undergo mastectomy instead.

Objective

To examine whether regional practice patterns of radiotherapy for DCIS affect the use of mastectomy in these patients.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective analysis of population-based databases (Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results [SEER] and SEER-Medicare). Data were obtained for 2679 women in SEER with a diagnosis of DCIS between 1990 and 2011 and for 757 women in SEER-Medicare with a DCIS diagnosis between 1991 and 2009 who had not undergone radiotherapy for DCIS and experienced a subsequent breast cancer or DCIS diagnosis.

Exposures

Treatment intensity for primary DCIS (high, medium, low), as defined by separating health service areas (HSAs) into 3 clusters based on radiotherapy use.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mastectomy vs BCS at a second breast event defined as DCIS recurrence or new invasive cancer.

Results

The median (SD) ages of the participants was 64 (13) years for the 2679 SEER population and 79 (6) years for the SEER-Medicare cohort. Residence in an HSA characterized by greater radiotherapy use for DCIS increased the likelihood of receiving mastectomy vs BCS at a subsequent breast event, even among women who had not previously received radiotherapy for DCIS. Adjusted odds ratios for receiving mastectomy were 1.43 (95% CI, 1.10-1.85) and 1.90 (95% CI, 1.27-2.84) in SEER and SEER-Medicare databases, respectively, among women residing in an HSA with the greatest radiotherapy use vs the least, corresponding to an adjusted increase from 40.8% to 49.6%, and from 38.6% to 54.5%.

Conclusions and Relevance

Areas with more radiotherapy use for DCIS had increased use of mastectomy at the time of a second breast event even among patients eligible for breast conservation. This association suggests that physician-related factors are affecting the likelihood of breast preservation.

Locoregional treatment of breast cancer in women with and without preoperative magnetic resonance imaging

BACKGROUND

Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use has increased among older women diagnosed with breast cancer. MRI detects additional malignancy, but its impact on locoregional surgery and radiation treatment remains unclear.

METHODS

We examined the associations of preoperative MRI with initial locoregional treatment type (mastectomy, breast conserving surgery [BCS] with radiation therapy [RT], and BCS without RT) and BCS reoperation rates for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare women diagnosed with stages 0 to III breast cancer from 2005 to 2009 (n = 55,997).

RESULTS

We found no association of initial locoregional treatment of mastectomy (odds ratios [OR], 1.04; 95% confidence intervals, .98 to 1.11) or reoperation after initial BCS (OR, .96; 95% confidence intervals, .89 to 1.03) between women with preoperative MRI (16.2%) compared to women without MRI. However, women with MRI who had initial BCS were more likely to undergo RT (OR, 1.09 [1.02 to 1.16]).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative breast MRI in Medicare-enrolled women with stages 0 to III breast cancer was not associated with increased mastectomy. However, in older women with MRI undergoing BCS, there was a greater use of RT.

Tailoring risk communication to improve comprehension: Do patient preferences help or hurt?

OBJECTIVE

Risk communication tools can facilitate patients' understanding of risk information. In this novel study, we examine the hypothesis that risk communication methods tailored to individuals' preferences can increase risk comprehension.

METHOD

Preferences for breast cancer risk formats, and risk comprehension data were collected using an online survey from 361 women at high risk for breast cancer. Women's initial preferences were assessed by asking them which of the following risk formats would be the clearest: (a) percentage, (b) frequency, (c) bar graph, (d) pictogram, and (e) comparison to other women. Next, women were presented with 5 different formats for displaying cancer risks and asked to interpret the risk information presented. Finally, they were asked again which risk format they preferred.

RESULTS

Initial preferences for risk formats were not associated with risk comprehension scores. However, women with lower risk comprehension scores were more likely to update their risk format preferences after they evaluated risks in different formats. Less numerate women were more likely to prefer graphical rather than numeric risk formats. Importantly, we found that women preferring graphical risk formats had lower risk comprehension in these formats compared to numeric formats. In contrast, women preferring numeric formats performed equally well across formats.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that tailoring risk communication to patient preferences may not improve understanding of medical risks, particularly for less numerate women, and point to the potential perils of tailoring risk communication formats to patient preferences. (PsycINFO Database Record

Abstract P2-10-01: onlineDeCISion.org: An interactive web-based clinical decision aid for DCIS treatment

Purpose: Treatment decisions regarding Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS) are complex, and patients often have inaccurate and incomplete understanding of the risks and benefits they face. Our objective was to create a web-based decision aid (onlineDeCISion.org) that can be used in clinical practice to guide both clinicians and their patients with these decisions.

Methods: We developed a web-based clinical decision aid to provide tailored information about DCIS treatment choices including an individual patient’s risk of recurrence, likelihood of long-term breast preservation and survival outcomes following up to 6 different treatment strategies for DCIS (lumpectomy, lumpectomy with radiation, lumpectomy with tamoxifen, lumpectomy with radiation and tamoxifen, and mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction). The decision aid is populated by our previously developed simulation model of DCIS outcomes. A theoretical framework and best-practices for web-based decision tools guided the development of the decision aid including semi-structured interviews and usability testing with a diverse group of multidisciplinary clinicians and patient advocates.

Results: The decision aid was designed to include these key features: 1) descriptions of treatment options; 2) ability to input patient health-adjusted age; 3) tailored likelihood of time-specific (10-year and lifetime) recurrence and survival outcomes; and 4) projections of downstream effects of each treatment. The decision aid provides default recurrence risks based on clinical trial data but allows clinicians to customize 10-year DCIS and invasive recurrence risks to retain flexibility to display expected outcomes for individual patients. These estimates can be based on the patient’s actual age, or age adjusted for health status, allowing for a more realistic expectation of the benefits each treatment holds.

Conclusion: Our web-based decision aid displays tailored outcomes following different treatment strategies for DCIS, allowing patients to be better informed about the tradeoffs of treatments available to them and select treatments consonant with their personal preferences, improving the quality of decision making for DCIS. The interactive design features allow users of the decision aid the ability to address uncertainty around risks of recurrence and comorbidity risks and facilitate the use of the decision aid across diverse populations. While the decision aid warrants further evaluation, the results of our study promise to improve decision making in patients with DCIS.

Citation Format: Elissa M Ozanne, Natasha K Stout, Katharine Schneider, Djøra Soeteman, Deborah Schrag, Michael Fordis, Rinaa S Punglia. onlineDeCISion.org: An interactive web-based clinical decision aid for DCIS treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2014 Dec 9-13; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(9 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-10-01.

Application of a decision analytic framework for adoption of clinical trial results: are the data regarding TARGIT-A IORT ready for prime time?

The results from randomized clinical trials are often adopted slowly. This practice potentially prevents many people from benefiting from more effective care. Provide a framework for analyzing clinical trial results to determine whether and when early adoption of novel interventions is appropriate. The framework includes the evaluation of three components: confidence in trial results, impact of early, and late adoption if trial results are reversed or sustained. The adverse impact of early adoption, and the opportunity cost of late adoption are determined using Markov modeling to simulate the impact of early and late adoption in terms of quality of life years and resources gained or lost. We applied the framework to the TARGIT-A randomized clinical trial comparing intraoperative radiation (IORT) to standard external beam radiation (EBRT) and considered these results in the context of trials comparing endocrine therapy with and without radiation therapy in postmenopausal women. Confidence in the TARGIT-A trial 4 year results is high because the peak hazard for local recurrence in the trial is between 2 and 3 years. This is consistent with most trials, and no second peak has been observed in similar patient populations, suggesting that the TARGIT-A trial results are stable. The interventions offer approximately equivalent life expectancy. If IORT local recurrences rate were as high as 10 % at 10 years (which is higher than expected), we would project only 0.002 fewer expected life years (less than 1 day) compared to EBRT if IORT is adopted early. However, there is a $1.7 billion opportunity cost of waiting an additional 5 years to adopt IORT in low risk, hormone-receptor-positive, postmenopausal women. EBRT costs an additional $1467 in indirect costs per patient. Applying an evaluative framework for the adoption of clinical trial results to the TARGIT-A IORT therapy trial results in the assessment that the trial results are stable, early adoption would lead to minimal adverse impact, and substantially less resource use. Both IORT and no radiation are reasonable strategies to adopt.

Aggregate cost of mammography screening in the United States: comparison of current practice and advocated guidelines

BACKGROUND

Controversy exists over how often and at what age mammography screening should be implemented. Given that evidence supports less frequent screening, the cost differences among advocated screening policies should be better understood.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the aggregate cost of mammography screening in the United States in 2010 and compare the costs of policy recommendations by professional organizations.

DESIGN

A model was developed to estimate the cost of mammography screening in 2010 and 3 screening strategies: annual (ages 40 to 84 years), biennial (ages 50 to 69 years), and U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines (biennial for those aged 50 to 74 years and personalized based on risk for those younger than 50 years and based on comorbid conditions for those 75 years and older).

SETTING

United States.

PATIENTS

Women aged 40 to 85 years.

INTERVENTION

Mammography annually, biennially, or following USPSTF guidelines.

MEASUREMENTS

Cost of screening per year, using Medicare reimbursements.

RESULTS

The estimated cost of mammography screening in the United States in 2010 was $7.8 billion, with approximately 70% of women screened. The simulated cost of screening 85% of women was $10.1 billion, $2.6 billion, and $3.5 billion for annual, biennial, and USPSTF guidelines, respectively. The largest drivers of cost (in order) were screening frequency, percentage of women screened, cost of mammography, percentage of women screened with digital mammography, and percentage of mammography recalls.

LIMITATION

Cost estimates and assumptions used in the model were conservative.

CONCLUSION

The cost of mammography varies by at least $8 billion per year on the basis of screening strategy. The USPSTF guidelines are based on the scientific evidence to date to maximize patient benefit and minimize harm but also result in far more effective use of resources.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

University of California and the Safeway Foundation.

Development of a personalized decision aid for breast cancer risk reduction and management

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer risk reduction has the potential to decrease the incidence of the disease, yet remains underused. We report on the development a web-based tool that provides automated risk assessment and personalized decision support designed for collaborative use between patients and clinicians.

METHODS

Under Institutional Review Board approval, we evaluated the decision tool through a patient focus group, usability testing, and provider interviews (including breast specialists, primary care physicians, genetic counselors). This included demonstrations and data collection at two scientific conferences (2009 International Shared Decision Making Conference, 2009 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium).

RESULTS

Overall, the evaluations were favorable. The patient focus group evaluations and usability testing (N = 34) provided qualitative feedback about format and design; 88% of these participants found the tool useful and 94% found it easy to use. 91% of the providers (N = 23) indicated that they would use the tool in their clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

BreastHealthDecisions.org represents a new approach to breast cancer prevention care and a framework for high quality preventive healthcare. The ability to integrate risk assessment and decision support in real time will allow for informed, value-driven, and patient-centered breast cancer prevention decisions. The tool is being further evaluated in the clinical setting.

The psychometric properties of CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of the shared decision-making process

BACKGROUND

Patient-centered health care is a central component of current health policy agendas. Shared decision making (SDM) is considered to be the pinnacle of patient engagement and methods to promote this are becoming commonplace. However, the measurement of SDM continues to prove challenging. Reviews have highlighted the need for a patient-reported measure of SDM that is practical, valid, and reliable to assist implementation efforts. In consultation with patients, we developed CollaboRATE, a 3-item measure of the SDM process.

OBJECTIVE

There is a need for scalable patient-reported measure of the SDM process. In the current project, we assessed the psychometric properties of CollaboRATE.

METHODS

A representative sample of the US population were recruited online and were randomly allocated to view 1 of 6 simulated doctor-patient encounters in January 2013. Three dimensions of SDM were manipulated in the encounters: (1) explanation of the health issue, (2) elicitation of patient preferences, and (3) integration of patient preferences. Participants then completed CollaboRATE (possible scores 0-100) in addition to 2 other patient-reported measures of SDM: the 9-item Shared Decision Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and the Doctor Facilitation subscale of the Patient's Perceived Involvement in Care Scale (PICS). A subsample of participants was resurveyed between 7 and 14 days after the initial survey. We assessed CollaboRATE's discriminative, concurrent, and divergent validity, intrarater reliability, and sensitivity to change.

RESULTS

The final sample consisted of 1341 participants. CollaboRATE demonstrated discriminative validity, with a significant increase in CollaboRATE score as the number of core dimensions of SDM increased from zero (mean score: 46.0, 95% CI 42.4-49.6) to 3 (mean score 85.8, 95% CI 83.2-88.4). CollaboRATE also demonstrated concurrent validity with other measures of SDM, excellent intrarater reliability, and sensitivity to change; however, divergent validity was not demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

The fast and frugal nature of CollaboRATE lends itself to routine clinical use. Further assessment of CollaboRATE in real-world settings is required.

Patient preferences regarding intraoperative versus external beam radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery

The TARGIT-A Trial is an international randomized, prospective trial comparing intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) for equivalence to external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) following lumpectomy for invasive breast cancer in selected low-risk patients; early results suggest that outcomes are similar. In addition to effectiveness data and cost considerations, the preferences of patients should help inform practice. This study was undertaken to explore and quantify preference in choosing between IORT and the current standard, EBRT. Eligible subjects were current or past candidates for breast-conserving surgery and radiation being seen at the University of California, San Francisco Breast Care Center. A trade-off technique varying the risk of local recurrence for IORT was used to quantify any additional accepted risk that these patients would accept to receive either treatment. Patients were first presented with a slideshow comparing EBRT with the experimental IORT option before being asked their preferences given hypothetical 10-year local recurrence risks. Patients were then given a questionnaire on demographic, social and clinical factors. Data from 81 patients were analyzed. The median additional accepted risk to have IORT was 2.3 % (-9 to 39 %), mean 3.2 %. Only 7 patients chose to accept additional risk for EBRT; 22 accepted IORT at no additional risk; and the remaining 52 chose IORT with some additional risk. Patients weigh trade-offs of risks and benefits when presented with medical treatment choices. Our results show that the majority of breast cancer patients will accept a small increment of local risk for a simpler delivery of radiation. Further studies that incorporate outcome and side effect data from the TARGIT-A trial clarify the expected consequences of a local recurrence, and include an expanded range of radiation options that could help guide clinical decision making in this area.

Developing CollaboRATE: a fast and frugal patient-reported measure of shared decision making in clinical encounters

OBJECTIVE

Measuring the process of shared decision making is a challenge, which constitutes a barrier to research and implementation. The aim of the study was to report the development of CollaboRATE, brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making.

METHODS

We used the following stages: (1) item formulation; (2) cognitive interviews; (3) item refinement; and (4) pilot testing of final items. Participants were over 18 years old, recruited from the public areas of the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center.

RESULTS

The key finding of this study is that developing a brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making requires a move away from terms such as 'decisions', 'options' and 'preferences'. Although technically correct, these terms act as barriers. They are often unfamiliar, and they also implicitly assume that patients are willing to take active roles in decision making; whereas patients are often unaware that decisions are required, or have taken place, never mind feel that they could or should have participated in them.

CONCLUSION

These methods have allowed us to develop a brief, patient-reported measure of shared decision making that is highly accessible to intended users.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The potential strength of the CollaboRATE will be the ability for completion in less than 30s, and across a range of routine settings.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of intraoperative radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Shortened courses of radiation therapy have been shown to be similarly effective to whole-breast external-beam radiation therapy (WB-EBRT) in terms of local control. We sought to analyze, from a societal perspective, the cost-effectiveness of two radiation strategies for early-stage invasive breast cancer: single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) and the standard 6-week course of WB-EBRT.

METHODS

We developed a Markov decision-analytic model to evaluate these treatment strategies in terms of life expectancy, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), costs, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over 10 years.

RESULTS

IORT single-dose intraoperative radiation therapy was the dominant, more cost-effective strategy, providing greater quality-adjusted life years at a decreased cost compared with 6-week WB-EBRT. The model was sensitive to health state utilities and recurrence rates, but not costs. IORT was either the preferred or dominant strategy across all sensitivity analyses. The two-way sensitivity analyses demonstrate the need to accurately determine utility values for the two forms of radiation treatment and to avoid indiscriminate use of IORT.

CONCLUSIONS

With less cost and greater QALYs than WB-EBRT, IORT is the more valuable strategy. IORT offers a unique example of new technology that is less costly than the current standard of care option but offers similar efficacy. Even when considering the capital investment for the equipment ($425 K, low when compared with the investments required for robotic surgery or high-dose-rate brachytherapy), which could be recouped after 3-4 years conservatively, these results support IORT as a change in practice for treating early-stage invasive breast cancer.

Modeling the effectiveness of initial management strategies for ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and the marked variability in patterns of care highlight the need for comparative effectiveness research. We sought to quantify the tradeoffs among alternative management strategies for DCIS with respect to disease outcomes and breast preservation.

METHODS

We developed a disease simulation model integrating data from the published literature to simulate the clinical events after six treatments (lumpectomy alone, lumpectomy with radiation, lumpectomy with radiation and tamoxifen, lumpectomy with tamoxifen, and mastectomy with and without breast reconstruction) for women with newly diagnosed DCIS. Outcomes included disease-free, invasive disease-free, and overall survival and breast preservation.

RESULTS

For a cohort of 1 million simulated women aged 45 years at diagnosis, both mastectomy and lumpectomy with radiation and tamoxifen were associated with a 12-month improvement in overall survival relative to lumpectomy alone. Adding radiation therapy to lumpectomy resulted in a 6-month improvement in overall survival but decreased long-term breast-preservation outcomes (likelihood of lifetime breast preservation = 0.781 vs 0.843 for lumpectomy alone). This decrement with radiation therapy was mitigated by the addition of tamoxifen (likelihood of lifetime breast preservation = 0.846).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall survival benefits of the six management strategies for DCIS are within 1 year, suggesting that treatment decisions can be informed by the patient's preference for breast preservation and disutility for recurrence. Our delineation of personalized outcomes for each strategy can help patients understand the implications of their treatment choice, so their decisions may reflect their own personal values and help improve the quality of care for patients with DCIS.

Abstract P3-02-12: The Cost of Mammography Screening in the United States by Screening Policy

Background: Multiple mammography screening strategies exist; however, the resources associated with screening strategies are not well known and are rarely discussed. Many organizations recommend annual mammography for women over the age of 40, while the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) and most countries outside the US recommend biennial screening, focusing screening efforts on women over 50 years. Additionally, some suggest risk-based approaches to improve screening. This analysis seeks to estimate the aggregate cost of mammography screening in the US in 2010 and to then further compare the costs of these proposed strategies, specifically comparing annual versus biennial screening.

Methods: We simulated the annual cost of mammography in the US under the following screening strategies: 1) estimate of screening that occurred in 2010 under current policy, 2) annual screening of women older than 40 years, 3) biennial screening of women 50 to 75 years, and 4) biennial screening of women 50 to 75 years and high risk women 40–50 years following USPSTF guidelines. The simulated 2010 screening policy was based on current screening rates ranging from 51% of forty-year-old women to 66% of sixty-five-year-old women. Screening strategies 2–4 simulated screening 85% of women overall, and for the USPSTF policy 20% of women 40–50 years were estimated to be high risk. The simulation was carried out using R statistical software.

Results: Aggregate costs of the four screening strategies were estimated. The total cost of mammography screening in the US in 2010 was estimated to be $7.95 billion. The projected cost under an annual screening policy beginning at 40 years was $10.71 billion. The projected cost of biennial screening from 50–75 years was $5.25 billion compared to $5.33 billion following the USPSTF guidelines. The biennial USPSTF policy cost $5.38 billion less than annual screening. The largest drivers of cost were the percent of women screened, the cost of a mammogram, and the percent of women recalled after mammography.

Conclusions: The costs of mammography vary greatly by strategy and are relevant to screening policy. The basic biennial strategy was the least expensive; however for a slight increase in cost, the USPSTF 2009 guideline strategy screened more age appropriate women for $2.62 billion less than current policy. For less cost, the modeled USPSTF guidelines screened 85% of women compared to current policies that screen less than 65% of women. Biennial screening provides screening to more women, lowers overall false-positive rates, and improves capacity for access to high-quality equipment and well-trained mammographers. As data to support evidenced based strategies increase, resources can be better allocated toward screening a broader, larger population of women that are most likely to benefit from screening. With no evidence for adverse outcomes, a biennial screening policy enables the population of US women to benefit from mammography for less cost.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-02-12.

Abstract P5-15-01: Cost-effectiveness of gene expression profiling for ductal carcinoma in-situ (Oncotype DCIS Score)

BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) affects nearly 50,000 women each year. More than 75% of women who receive lumpectomy (BCS) for DCIS undergo whole breast radiation (XRT), which is known to prevent local recurrences. A molecular assay for DCIS has recently been validated, that identifies low-risk biology and may give insight into the need for adjuvant XRT. We sought to determine the cost-effectiveness of the Oncotype DCIS Score™ for risk stratification in newly diagnosed DCIS.

METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of using this molecular assay (validated in the E5194 study) compared to standard clinical assessment to determine treatment recommendation for XRT. A Markov model was developed in TreeAge Pro 2011 and simulated relevant outcomes over a lifetime horizon for 55-year-old women. For those in the intervention arm who are stratified by the assay, it was assumed that 75% of women (low DCIS score) did not receive XRT and had local risk of recurrence (LRR) of 12%; 25% were intermediate or high risk by the DCIS score (LRR of 26%) and received 6 weeks of XRT with an assumed LRR of 13%. For those in the standard care arm who are stratified by clinical assessment, an assumed 25% did not receive XRT and had LRR of 15.4%; 75% received 6 weeks of XRT with an estimated LRR of 7.7%. Recurrence rates were based on ECOG 5194 and assumed 50% reduction with XRT. Utilities were derived from literature. Direct medical costs were obtained from Medicare fee schedule; indirect costs (time and transportation for XRT) were ascertained.

RESULTS: On average, the intervention (assay) strategy was less costly than the clinical assessment strategy by approximately $1000/patient, with similar life expectancies (17.15 vs 17.11, respectively) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (16.777 vs 16.789). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for changing strategy from the assay to clinical assessment was approximately $95,000/QALY, at the upper limit of the societal accepted willingness-to-pay threshold.

CONCLUSIONS: Based on the conservative assumptions that the benefit of XRT is independent of biology and that at least 75% of patients in E5194 would typically be offered XRT, the assay strategy is more cost-effective than standard clinical assessment. Additional research is needed to better understand health state utilities associated with less treatment as it pertains to risk of recurrence. Further validation studies of the assay are needed to accurately assess radiation benefit across all risk groups.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2012;72(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-15-01.

Abstract P4-01-15: Impact of Preoperative MRI on the Surgical Treatment of Breast Cancer: A SEER-Medicare Analysis

Background: Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use has increased for women with invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Prior studies have disputed whether preoperative MRI is associated with increased rates of mastectomy. We evaluated the rates of mastectomy versus breast conserving surgery (BCS) and their association with preoperative MRI in older women.

Methods: We identified women in SEER-Medicare 66 years or older diagnosed with DCIS or invasive breast cancer between 2002 and 2007 treated within 6 months of diagnosis with mastectomy or breast conserving surgery (BCS) with or without radiotherapy (RT). Preoperative MRI was defined as MRI occurring before a woman's first surgery after her initial diagnosis. We looked for surgical treatment (BCS or mastectomy) and radiotherapy, age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis and cancer type, overall and separately by receipt of MRI. We examined the association of surgical treatment with MRI using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, cancer type and radiotherapy.

Results: Among the 70,758 women identified, 5,126 (7.2%) had a preoperative MRI. The overall use of MRI increased from 1.2% in 2002 to 18.0% in 2007 (p &lt; 0.0001). Women with MRI were more likely to undergo mastectomy than those without MRI (331 per 1000 vs. 314 per 1000; respectively, p &lt; 0.0001) and more likely to undergo BCS RT (432 per 1000 vs. 354 per 1000; respectively, p &lt; 0.0001).

Conclusion: The use of preoperative MRI has increased in recent years and is significantly associated with increased rates of BCS RT and mastectomy. Limitations of this study include that it is an observational analysis and that selection bias may exist for MRI and aggressive treatment that is not related to what is observed on MRI. Further studies are needed to understand how patient characteristics and information obtained from MRI influence treatment choices.

Abstract P4-11-03: Single nucleotide polymorphism testing for breast cancer risk assessment: patient trust and willingness to pay

Background: The field of breast cancer risk assessment is advancing rapidly with recent discoveries about risk conferring single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). While these discoveries can promote personalized medicine, they are often brought to the market with direct to consumer (DTC) testing before data can support their widespread use and before reliable options for dealing with testing outcomes can be offered. In this context, and knowing that patients often misunderstand risk information, it is unclear how patients will respond to these options.

Methods: We surveyed high risk women's interest in SNP testing. Participants were recruited from the Cancer Genetics Network (CGN), a national network of cancer centers that maintains a database of individuals with a family history of cancer. Participants were asked to answer questions regarding their interest in SNP testing including: whether they trust it, how much they would be willing to pay for testing, how they prefer to be tested, and how they would proceed with information identifying them as below or above average risk.

Results: 189 women without a history of breast cancer or SNP testing completed the questionnaire. The average age of the participants was 49, ranging from 30 to 65. All participants had at least one relative with breast or ovarian cancer. 13% had previously tested positive for a BRCA mutation, and 33% had received BRCA testing. Most women (90%) did not know what SNP testing was prior to the survey. Once SNP testing was described, 68% of women were interested in DTC SNP testing; at the same time, only 38% of the participants reported that they trusted DTC SNP testing.

Abstract P4-13-13: Risk Assessment and Personalized Decision Support: The University of California Athena Breast Health Network

Background: The Athena Breast Health Network is a University of California (UC) initiative to drive rapid innovation in patient-centered prevention, screening, and treatment of breast cancer. Athena is a collaborative of the five UC medical centers and UC Berkeley that integrates clinical care and research, rapidly mobilizing data and research to enable continuous improvement in patient care and outcomes. The first initiative of Athena was to implement risk assessment for women being screened for breast cancer and to offer tailored referrals for women found to be at increased risk of developing breast cancer.

Methods: Patients who enroll in Athena complete an electronic questionnaire to collect personal and family history data prior to their mammography screening visit. These data are used to generate multiple risk assessments using the NCCN and USPSTF guidelines, and BCRAT (Gail model). Data on established breast cancer risk factors such as chest wall radiation and history of hormone replacement therapy are also collected and used to identify women at potentially increased risk. Upon enrollment, women are given the opportunity to provide a blood or saliva sample for research purposes.

Women who meet Athena-defined criteria that identify them to be at increased risk receive a referral to a Breast Health Specialist (BHS). The BHS identifies individual patient needs for prevention and screening services, including genetic counseling and testing, provides referrals to a High Risk Breast Clinic or nurse practitioner, and conducts lifestyle modification counseling. BHS have special training in breast cancer risk assessment, and some are licensed genetic counselors. Primary care and/or referring providers are directly informed of risk assessment results through mailings or the electronic medical record.

Results: The recruitment goal enrollment for Athena is 150,000 and to date more than 17,000 women have been enrolled across the five centers. Of those enrolled, 32% indicated that they have a family history of cancer. 56% of the cohort consented to participate in research, and 40% provided a biospecimen for research purposes. Across the five centers, 32 educational outreach sessions about Athena were held, reaching approximately 375 providers.

Abstract B81: Can “mHealth” improve risk assessment? A usability study of older, low-income women answering the Athena Breast Health Questionnaire app

Introduction: Mobile health (mHealth) tools may offer an opportunity for breast cancer screening and prevention especially among minority populations who are known to access the internet at higher rates with mobile devices. However, the use of mHealth applications (apps) has not been well studied in older, low-income, minority populations. This study sought to determine the usability of an mHealth Breast Health Risk Assessment Questionnaire app for older, low-income women.

Methods: We performed fifteen semi-structured interviews of women with diverse backgrounds who used the Athena Breast Health Questionnaire iPad app, which was available in Spanish and English. The app was developed by the Athena Breast Health Network, a breast cancer screening collaboration of the five University of California medical centers. Women were recruited during their screening mammography visit at the San Francisco General Hospital Avon Mammography Center.

Results: Fifteen women were interviewed; five Hispanic, five non-Hispanic white, three African American and two Filipina women. Four women were Spanish speaking only. The median age of women was 61 (range, 45-79). The women's level of education ranged from third grade to graduate school. Fourteen women owned a mobile phone, three owned a smart phone, and three had previously used an iPad. The average time to complete the questionnaire for all women was 16.4 minutes (range, 6.6-35 minutes). The subgroup of Spanish speaking women took longer, averaging 24.5 minutes. The majority of women needed initial instruction regarding scrolling and free text entry.

All fifteen women interviewed thought the Athena Breast Health Questionnaire app was easy or very easy to use. Eleven women preferred answering the iPad questionnaire compared to the pen-and-paper form previously completed for their mammogram. Two women preferred pen-and-paper, both Spanish speaking; and two women had no preference, including one who started using a mobile phone within the past month and another woman who did not own one. Three of the four women who did not prefer the app had lower than a tenth grade education. All four that did not prefer the app were concerned that a clinic would not be able to offer the initial instruction needed or to provide assistance for questions though they thought the app was easy to use.

Conclusion: Older, low-income, minority women easily used a mHealth app to answer a breast health risk assessment questionnaire. Particular formats of questions, such as the use of scrolling, were initially difficult but participants easily overcame such difficulties and learned the skills of using a touchscreen. Spanish speaking women had a lower preference for the app, but this finding may be confounded with education level. Further evaluation of the validity of women's responses using the app in a clinical setting is needed.

Citation Format: Cristina M. Thorsen, Celia P. Kaplan, Natasha Brasic, Laura J. Esserman, Judith A. Luce, Rebecca Howe, Laura J. van 't Veer, Carolina Bravo, Alyse Wheelock, Elissa M. Ozanne, . Athena Breast Health Network Investigators. Can “mHealth” improve risk assessment? A usability study of older, low-income women answering the Athena Breast Health Questionnaire app. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Fifth AACR Conference on the Science of Cancer Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; 2012 Oct 27-30; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012;21(10 Suppl):Abstract nr B81.

Annual screening strategies in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers: a comparative effectiveness analysis

BACKGROUND

Although breast cancer screening with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended for breast cancer-susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutation carriers, there is no current consensus on the optimal screening regimen.

METHODS

The authors used a computer simulation model to compare 6 annual screening strategies (film mammography [FM], digital mammography [DM], FM and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI] or DM and MRI contemporaneously, and alternating FM/MRI or DM/MRI at 6-month intervals) beginning at ages 25 years, 30 years, 35 years, and 40 years, and 2 strategies of annual MRI with delayed alternating DM/FM versus clinical surveillance alone. Strategies were evaluated without and with mammography-induced breast cancer risk using 2 models of excess relative risk. Input parameters were obtained from the medical literature, publicly available databases, and calibration.

RESULTS

Without radiation risk effects, alternating DM/MRI starting at age 25 years provided the highest life expectancy (BRCA1, 72.52 years, BRCA2, 77.63 years). When radiation risk was included, a small proportion of diagnosed cancers was attributable to radiation exposure (BRCA1, <2%; BRCA2, <4%). With radiation risk, alternating DM/MRI at age 25 years or annual MRI at age 25 years/delayed alternating DM at age 30 years was the most effective, depending on the radiation risk model used. Alternating DM/MRI starting at age 25 years also produced the highest number of false-positive screens per woman (BRCA1, 4.5 BRCA2, 8.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Annual MRI at age 25 years/delayed alternating DM at age 30 years is probably the most effective screening strategy in BRCA mutation carriers. Screening benefits, associated risks, and personal acceptance of false-positive results should be considered in choosing the optimal screening strategy for individual women.

Bias in the reporting of family history: implications for clinical care

Family history of cancer is critical for identifying and managing patients at risk for cancer. However, the quality of family history data is dependent on the accuracy of patient self reporting. Therefore, the validity of family history reporting is crucial to the quality of clinical care. A retrospective review of family history data collected at a community hospital between 2005 and 2009 was performed in 43,257 women presenting for screening mammography. Reported numbers of breast, colon, prostate, lung, and ovarian cancer were compared in maternal relatives vs. paternal relatives and in first vs. second degree relatives. Significant reporting differences were found between maternal and paternal family history of cancer, in addition to degree of relative. The number of paternal family histories of cancer was significantly lower than that of maternal family histories of cancer. Similarly, the percentage of grandparents' family histories of cancer was significantly lower than the percentage of parents' family histories of cancer. This trend was found in all cancers except prostate cancer. Self-reported family history in the community setting is often influenced by both bloodline of the cancer history and the degree of relative affected. This is evident by the underreporting of paternal family histories of cancer, and also, though to a lesser extent, by degree. These discrepancies in reporting family history of cancer imply we need to take more care in collecting accurate family histories and also in the clinical management of individuals in relation to hereditary risk.

Characterizing the impact of 25 years of DCIS treatment

The significant increase in the detection and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) since the introduction of screening mammography has not been accompanied by the anticipated reduction in invasive breast cancer (IBC) incidence. The prevalence of DCIS requires a reexamination of the population level effects of detecting and treating DCIS. To further our understanding of the possible impact of DCIS diagnosis and treatment on IBC incidence in the U.S., we simulated breast cancer incidence over 25 years under various assumptions regarding the baseline incidence of IBC and the progression of DCIS to IBC. The simulations demonstrate a tradeoff between the expected increased incidence of IBC absent any DCIS detection and treatment and the rate of progression of DCIS to IBC. Our analyses indicate that a high progression of DCIS to IBC implies a significant increase in incidence of IBC over what is observed had we not detected and treated DCIS. Conversely, if we assume that there would not have been a significant increase over and above the observed incidence evident in SEER, then our model indicates that the rate of DCIS progression to clinically significant IBC is low. Given the tradeoff illustrated by our model, we must reevaluate the assumption that DCIS is a short-term obligate precursor of invasive cancer and instead focus on further exploration of the true natural history of DCIS.