Abstract P4-06-07: Trends and results of BRCA1/2 and multigene panel testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients

Background: Next-generation sequencing technology, reduced costs and public interest have fueled a surge in more expansive germline genetic testing of breast cancer patients. However, there are no population-based data on trends in use of different test types or the distribution of results.

Methods: In the iCanCare study, we surveyed 7,303 women diagnosed in 2013-15 with early-stage breast cancer and reported to the Georgia and Los Angeles County SEER registries. Of 5,080 respondents (response rate 70%), 5,050 were linked to SEER clinical data and to test results from four commercial laboratories that performed nearly all germline genetic testing for breast cancer patients in the regions. We examined trends in test type (two genes, BRCA1/2 only, vs. more cancer susceptibility genes, multigene panel) and patterns of results (positive for a pathogenic mutation; variant of uncertain significance (VUS); negative) by clinical and sociodemographic subgroups. Pre-test risk of having a pathogenic mutation was categorized as higher vs. average based on patient report of age at diagnosis, family cancer history, ancestry (Ashkenazi Jewish vs. not) and breast cancer subtype (triple-negative vs. not), according to practice guidelines criteria for genetic testing.

Results: The mean age was 62 years; 26%, 49% and 25% had stage 0, I, and II cancer, respectively; 78% had estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative disease, and 9% had triple-negative; 28% had higher pre-test risk of having a pathogenic mutation; 56% were non-Hispanic white, 18% African American, 14% Hispanic, and 10% Asian. Genetic testing use did not change over time (p=0.695), with one-quarter of patients receiving any test (either BRCA1/2 only or multigene panel) according to clinical laboratory data. However, testing included more genes over time: multigene panels comprised 19% of tests in 2013 vs. 66% in 2015 (p<0.001). Among all patients, 14% received BRCA1/2 only and 12% multigene panel testing, with no differences in test type by pre-test risk or race/ethnicity. Among all patients, 7% had a pathogenic mutation and 14% had a VUS in any gene. Patients at high pre-test risk had a lower ratio of uninformative VUS to informative pathogenic mutations (14%/10%) than average risk patients (15%/4%, p<0.001). There was a substantially higher ratio of VUS to pathogenic mutation among African Americans (22%/7%) and Asians (23%/3%) than other racial/ethnic groups (12%/8%, p<0.001).

Conclusions: In a large, diverse, contemporary sample of early-stage breast cancer patients accrued from population-based registries and linked to clinical laboratory data, one-quarter had genetic testing, with multigene panels markedly replacing BRCA1/2-only tests over time. The ratio of uninformative VUS to informative pathogenic mutation results was lowest in women at high pre-test risk and highest among racial/ethnic minorities. These findings can inform genetic counseling and they emphasize the urgent need to re-classify VUS results in racial/ethnic minorities. More research is needed to determine the impact of this marked increased in multigene panel testing on patient experiences, and the impact of test results on treatment decision-making and outcomes.

Citation Format: Kurian AW, Katz SJ. Trends and results of BRCA1/2 and multigene panel testing in newly diagnosed breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-06-07.

Abstract P2-02-06: Genetic counseling, germline genetic testing, and impact of results in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer

The surge in BRCA1/2 and multiple-gene panel testing after a diagnosis of breast cancer has fueled concerns about how genetic testing results will be integrated into patient management. However, there is virtually no research about the timing or extent of genetic counseling before or after testing or the impact of genetic results on bilateral mastectomy (BLM) use since the advent of more widespread testing.

Methods: A population-based sample of 3600 patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer identified by two SEER registries (Georgia and Los Angeles County) were sent surveys two months after surgery (Dx dates 2014-15) about their genetic testing and treatment experiences. Survey information was merged with SEER data. We examined patterns and correlates of counseling and genetic testing and the impact of results on patient preferences for BLM and receipt of BLM.

Results: Among 2388 patients with unilateral breast cancer (response 70%), 697 (29.2%) had elevated pre-test risk of a germline mutation (based on age, family cancer history, ancestry, and tumor subtype). One-quarter of these higher risk patients (25.6%) did not discuss whether to have testing with any provider, 26.1% discussed it with clinicians only, and 48.3% had a visit with a genetic counselor. Half of patients with elevated pre-test risk (51.2%) were tested: 6.6% before diagnosis, 65.4% after diagnosis but before surgery and 28.0% after surgery. Higher risk patients who underwent testing were younger (p<.001) and had higher income (p=.029) but rates did not differ significantly by race, education, insurance, marital status, cancer stage, comorbidities, or geographic site after controlling for all covariates. There was wide variation in the type of professional who discussed test results with patients: discussed with surgeon only (17.8%), medical oncologist only (19.7%), both physicians but no counselor (4.8%), or genetic counselors (56.8%). Among all testers in the total sample (n=667), 54 (9.4%) reported a pathogenic mutation (12.1% of higher risk patients vs 5.7% of low risk patients) and 59 (10.0%) reported a variant of unknown significance (VUS) (10.2% of higher risk patients vs 9.9% of lower risk patients), p=.027 for differences between groups. Two-thirds (60.4%) of patients with pathogenic mutations reported that the test made them more interested in BLM vs 8.8% of those with a VUS, and 11.4% of those with negative tests, p<.001. Two-thirds (69.2%) of those with pathogenic mutations received BLM vs 21.9% of those with VUS and 27.9% of those with negative tests, p<.001.

Conclusions: Many patients newly diagnosed with breast cancer at higher risk of carrying a pathogenic mutation do not receive pre-test counseling or genetic testing and disparities are observed. There is wide variability in the timing of genetic testing after diagnosis and with which clinician the findings are discussed. Taken together, these results suggest that germline genetic testing after a diagnosis of breast cancer is poorly integrated into practice. However, the impact of genetic test results on patient attitudes and receipt of bilateral mastectomy suggests that genetic testing does help target prevention to a patient's future risk for a new primary breast cancer.

Citation Format: Katz SJ, Morrow M, Jagsi R, Kurian A. Genetic counseling, germline genetic testing, and impact of results in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P2-02-06.

Abstract P2-19-01: Impact of breast reconstruction approach on patient-reported satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes after mastectomy with and without radiotherapy

Background: The optimal approach to combining breast reconstruction with post-mastectomy radiation (RT) remains hotly debated. We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of different approaches using patient-reported outcomes from a longitudinal survey of patients identified through population-based registries.

Methods: We conducted a multicenter cohort study of women diagnosed with stage 0-III breast cancer from 2005-07, as reported to the Los Angeles and Detroit SEER registries. We surveyed 2290 women approximately 9 months after diagnosis and again after 4 years (n = 1536). The primary dependent variable was a composite measure of satisfaction with the cosmetic outcomes of reconstruction derived from 5 items (range 1-5; Cronbach's alpha 0.91). A linear regression model evaluated the impact of reconstruction type and timing, as well as interaction with RT, controlling for age, education, and marital status, after selection from a variety of sociodemographic and clinical variables (race/ethnicity chemotherapy, contralateral mastectomy, cancer stage, comorbidities, smoking, body-mass index, bra cup size, and geographic site).

Results: Of the 1450 patients who responded to both surveys and had not recurred, 222 received mastectomy and reconstruction, of whom 201 had complete variable information. There were 53 patients who had RT (among whom 53% had autologous technique and 47% had delayed timing) and 148 who did not (among whom 23% had autologous technique and 29% had delayed timing). Patients who received autologous reconstruction vs implants reported higher cosmetic satisfaction. Receipt of RT was associated with lower satisfaction. The adjusted scaled satisfaction score was 4.39 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction without RT, 4.09 for patients receiving autologous reconstruction and RT, 3.86 for patients receiving implant reconstruction without RT, and 2.71 for patients receiving implant reconstruction and RT. Patients who received RT and implant-based reconstruction had significantly lower satisfaction than the other 3 groups. Timing of reconstruction was not significantly associated with satisfaction, nor was there a significant interaction between timing and RT.

Linear Regression Model of Satisfaction with Reconstruction Outcomes (n = 201)CharacteristicCoefficient95% CIpIntercept3.86(3.37,4.35)<0.001Recon type & RT status  <0.001Autologous, no RT0.53(0.06,1.00) Autologous with RT0.23(-0.30,0.75) Implant, no RT00 Implant with RT-1.15(-1.84,-0.47) Reconstruction timing  0.97Immediate0.009(-0.44,0.45) Delayed00 Age (centered on 60)-0.02(-0.05, -0.001)0.04Married/partnered  0.06Yes-0.40(-0.82,0.02) No00 Education  0.35HS or less-0.23(-0.70,0.24) Some college-0.32(-0.77,0.13) College or more00 

Conclusions: In patients undergoing post-mastectomy RT, use of autologous reconstruction may mitigate some of the deleterious impact on cosmetic outcomes, but this requires confirmation in a larger dataset. This study had limited power to evaluate whether delaying reconstruction preferentially benefits radiated patients.

Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P2-19-01.

Factors associated with bilateral versus single mastectomy in a diverse, population-based sample of breast cancer patients

6502

Background: Rates of bilateral mastectomy are increasing in the U.S., even among women with cancer in only one breast. The goal of this analysis was to assess correlates of bilateral mastectomy in a large, racially/ethnically diverse sample of breast cancer patients. Methods: All women with ductal carcinoma-in-situ and a 20% random sample of women with invasive breast cancer aged < 79 years who were diagnosed in 2002 and reported to the Detroit and Los Angeles SEER registries were surveyed shortly after receipt of surgical treatment (response rate, 77.4%; n = 1,844). Patient survey data were merged with SEER data. The primary dependent variable, receipt of bilateral mastectomy, was obtained from patient report and validated by SEER. Independent variables included patient demographics, family history of breast cancer, tumor stage, and patient concerns about recurrence and body image. Logistic regression was used to evaluate factors associated with receipt of all mastectomy (including bilateral) vs. lumpectomy, and then to evaluate bilateral vs. single mastectomy. Results: The mean age was 60 years. 70% were white, 18% Black, and 12% Latina. Overall, 5% of women received bilateral mastectomy (13% of those getting mastectomy). The Table shows factors associated with receipt of any mastectomy vs. lumpectomy (model 1) and bilateral vs. single mastectomy (model 2). Advanced stage and concerns about recurrence were associated with increased odds of any mastectomy while body image concerns were associated with lumpectomy (P<0.05) (model 1). Model 2 shows family history (OR: 3.00; 95% CI 1.36–6.61) and concerns about recurrence (OR: 2.76, 95% CI 1.14–6.68) were associated with greater odds of receiving bilateral vs. single mastectomy. Conclusions: Decision making for any mastectomy vs. lumpectomy is quite different from that for bilateral vs. single mastectomy. The latter appears to be driven by genetic predisposition, but there continues to be a strong influence of women's concerns about recurrence.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Integrating cancer care: Patient and practice management processes among surgeons who treat breast cancer

6526

Background: The Institute of Medicine has called for cancer care models that parallel those underway to integrate the management of patients with chronic conditions. The objective of this study was to evaluate patterns and correlates of such initiatives in the practices of surgeons treating women with breast cancer. Methods: We developed 5 multi-item scales to describe breast cancer patient and practice management processes based on the Chronic Care Model (multidisciplinary clinician communication; availability of clinical information; patient decision support; access to information technology; and practice management initiatives). We then performed a survey among attending surgeons of a population-based sample of patients diagnosed with breast cancer during a period from June 2005-February 2007 in metropolitan Los Angeles and Detroit (N = 312, response rate 76.1%). We evaluated the distribution of management process measures across selected characteristics of providers and practices. Results: About half of the surgeons devoted 15% or less of their total practice to breast cancer; while 16.2% of surgeons devoted 50% or more. The deployment of management processes varied markedly with most surgeons reporting low use. For example, only about 10% of surgeons indicated that half or more of their patients were exposed to multidisciplinary physician communication; while only 5% indicated that half or more of their patients were provided decision and care support services such as attending a presentation or viewing a video about breast cancer prior to surgery or attended a patient support group. Management process measures were positively associated with greater levels of surgeon specialization and the presence of a teaching program. Cancer program status (NCI center, ACS cancer program, neither) was weakly associated with any of the management process measures. Conclusions: The low uptake of patient and practice management processes observed in this study suggests that breast surgeons are not convinced that these processes matter or that there are logistical and cost barriers to implementation. More research is needed to understand how variation in patient and practice management processes may affect the quality of care for patients with breast cancer.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Does it matter where you go for breast cancer surgery?

6504

Background: Variation in receipt of local therapy for breast cancer has motivated research addressing whether treatment differences are attributable to surgeons. We assessed the amount of variation in receipt of mastectomy and breast reconstruction attributable to surgeons and evaluated patient and surgeon factors associated with treatment variability. Methods: Women with non-metastatic breast cancer aged 20–79 diagnosed from June 2005-February 2007 in Detroit and Los Angeles were surveyed after surgical treatment (response rate 72%, N = 2,260). Attending surgeons were surveyed (response rate 76.1%, N = 318). Patient and surgeon data were merged to SEER data (1764 patients and 295 surgeons). Two dependent variables were receipt of mastectomy and reconstruction. Patient variables were age, ethnicity, marital status, tumor size, behavior, and grade. Surgeon factors included age, gender, years in practice, percent of total practice devoted to breast cancer, hospital setting, and 3 scales measuring patient management processes. We used separate random effects models for each dependent variable to determine the amount of treatment variation attributable to surgeons and the amount of within-surgeon variability explained by patient and surgeon factors. Results: The number of patients per surgeon ranged from 1 to 35 (mean 5.5). One-third of women received mastectomy, 30% of whom received reconstruction. The amount of variation in mastectomy attributable to individual surgeons was moderate (8%, median odds ratio 1.7). Patient factors explained half this variation, while surgeon factors explained very little (<1%). The amount of variation in reconstruction attributable to individual surgeons was large (18%, median odds ratio 2.3), with patient level factors explaining one third of this variation. One surgeon level factor (propensity to refer to a plastic surgeon prior to surgery) explained an additional third of the variance. Conclusions: These results suggest that individual surgeons and their attributes contribute only modestly to the variation in primary surgery for breast cancer. By contrast, individual surgeons play a much larger role in explaining the wide variation in receipt of breast reconstruction- primarily through preoperative referral to plastic surgeons.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Adjuvant radiotherapy use in a population-based sample of breast cancer patients

617

Background: Previous studies have suggested underutilization and socioeconomic disparities in use of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) among patients with breast cancer. However, these studies used registry data which may be incomplete. Methods: We evaluated data from 2260 survey respondents with nonmetastatic breast cancer, aged 20–79 years, diagnosed from June 2005-February 2007 in Detroit and Los Angeles and reported to SEER registries (72% response rate). Survey responses regarding treatment and sociodemographic factors were merged to SEER data. Rates of RT receipt were based on patient report. Patients were divided into 3 populations: DCIS pts undergoing breast conservation (BCS), invasive pts undergoing BCS, and invasive pts undergoing mastectomy. These were then stratified based on recurrence risk in the absence of RT (3 groups based on tumor size and grade for DCIS pts, 2 groups separating pts over 70 with Stage I, ER+ tumors from others undergoing BCS for invasive disease, and 3 groups based on tumor size and nodal status for those undergoing mastectomy for invasive disease). Results: Among 306 pts undergoing BCS for DCIS, 85.6% received RT (77.9% of pts at low recurrence risk, 84.8% at intermediate risk, and 95.8% at high risk). Among 1018 pts undergoing BCS for invasive disease, 93.6% received RT (83.6% of low-risk patients and 94.9% of others). Among 661 pts undergoing mastectomy for invasive disease, 39.3% received RT (81.5% of pts at high-risk, 44.5% at intermediate-risk, and 12.1% at low risk). In separate multivariate logistic regression models including risk grouping and sociodemographic variables for each population, there were no significant associations between RT receipt and race, education, or income. Among pts receiving RT, delay was reported by 15.9% of the DCIS group, 19.5% of those treated for invasive disease after BCS, and 27.4% of those treated for invasive disease after mastectomy. Conclusions: RT use is high after BCS with little evidence of socioeconomic disparities. But lower than optimal rates after mastectomy even among patients with high expected benefit suggest lingering barriers to effective treatment in these patients. Less RT use in patients with lower expected benefit suggests that legitimate clinical uncertainty influences decision-making.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Racial/ethnic differences in treatment delay in a multiethnic sample of women with breast cancer

6503

Background: Factors contributing to racial/ethnic variation in breast cancer treatment delay remain understudied, especially in multi-ethnic population-based samples. Methods: 3,252 women with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed between 6/05–2/07 and reported to the Los Angeles County and Detroit, Surveillance Epidemiologic and End Results (SEER) registries were surveyed after initial treatment (mean time from diagnosis = 8.9 months). Latina and African American (AA) women were over- sampled (n=2260, eligible response rate 72.1%). Treatment delay was defined as the patient's report of the duration between when breast cancer was first diagnosed and first surgical procedure (< 1month, 1–3months, ≥4 months) . Multinomial logistic regression models were used to estimate the relative odds of treatment delay by race/ethnicity before and after adjustment for sociodemographics (age, education, income, marital status), clinical factors (number of co-morbidities, health status at diagnosis), and access barriers (difficulty: finding doctors to treat cancer, scheduling surgical procedure, getting to doctor's office). Results: Of the 2195 women who had a surgical procedure, 6.9 % experienced treatment delay of ≥4 months (10.4% Latina, 9.3% AA, 5.5% white women). Latina and AA women were more likely to experience longer treatment delay than white women [OR for ≥4 months/1–3 months vs. < 1 month: 2.18/1.77 for Latinas; 1.78/1.50 for AA (p<.001)] (Table). Racial/ethnic differences persisted after adjustment for sociodemographic, clinical factors, and access barriers [OR for ≥4 months/1–3 months vs. < 1 month: 1.31/1.79 for Latinas; 1.64/1.55 for AA, (p<.001)] (Table), although Latina vs. white differences were no longer statistically significant. Conclusions: Our results confirm that racial/ethnic minorities are vulnerable to delay in receipt of breast cancer treatment in a large population based sample of breast cancer patients. Further work is needed to evaluate the underlying causes of this delay.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Patterns and consequences of missed work after diagnosis of breast cancer

9015

Background: Work loss is a potential adverse consequence of cancer. However, there is little research on patterns and correlates of paid work from diagnosis through initial treatment and the impact of missed work on family and finances. Methods: 2,030 women with non-metastatic breast cancer diagnosed from 8/05–5/06 and reported to the Los Angeles County SEER registry were identified and mailed a survey shortly after receipt of surgical treatment. Latina and African American (AA) women were over-sampled. Outcome measures included missed paid work (<1 month, =1 month, stopped all together) and impact on finances (difficulty paying bills or cutting down on general expenses). We report results on a 50% respondent sample (N=742) which will be updated based on a final respondent sample of 1,400 patients (projected response rate, 72%). Results: Of the 440 women (59%) that worked prior to breast cancer, 35%, 26%, and 39% missed <1month, =1month, or stopped working, respectively. African Americans and Latinas (especially those who primarily speak Spanish) were more likely to stop working as compared to whites [OR for stop working vs. missed <1month: 3.5 (p<.001); 4.0 (p<.001) respectively]. Women receiving chemotherapy were also more likely to stop working after adjusting for other sociodemographic and treatment factors [ORs for stopped working vs. missed <1month: 8.4 (p <.001)]. Having sick leave and a flexible work schedule available through work was protective against work stoppage [ORs for stopped working vs. missed <1month: 0.2 (p<.001), 0.1 (p<.001) respectively)] after adjusting for sociodemographic and treatment factors. Women who stopped work were more likely to report both difficulty paying bills, and the need to cut down on expenses compared to women who missed <1month [ORs: 3.3 (p=.002); 3.6 (p<.002) respectively]. Conclusions: Many women stop working altogether after a diagnosis of breast cancer, particularly if they receive chemotherapy, have limited resources, or are employed in vulnerable work settings. These women face adverse economic consequences. Clinicians and staff need to be aware of these adverse consequences of diagnosis and initial treatment particularly in ethnic minorities and low-income patients.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Latina patient perspectives about informed decision making for surgical breast cancer treatment

6544

Background: Although increasing informed decision making has been identified as a mechanism for reducing disparities in breast cancer treatment outcomes, little is known about these issues from the Latina perspective. Methods: 2,030 women with non- metastatic breast cancer diagnosed from 8/05–5/06 and reported to the Los Angeles County SEER registry were identified and mailed a survey shortly after receipt of surgical treatment. Latina and African American women were over-sampled. Survey data were merged to SEER clinical data. We report results on a 50% respondent sample (N=742) which will be updated based on a final respondent sample of 1,400 patients (projected response rate, 72%). Dependent variables were patient reports of how decisions were made (doctor-based, shared, patient-based); their preferred amount of decisional involvement; and two 5-item scales measuring satisfaction with decision-making and decisional regret. Results: 32% of women were white, 28% African American (AA), 20% Latina-English speaking (L-E), and 20% Latina-Spanish speaking (L- SP). About 28% of women in each ethnic group reported a surgeon-based, 33% a shared, and 38% a patient-based surgical treatment decision. L- SP women reported wanting more involvement in decision making more often than white, AA or L-E women (16% vs. 4%, 5%, 5%, respectively, p<0.001). All minority groups were less likely than white women to have high decisional satisfaction with L-SP women having the lowest satisfaction (w-74%, AA-63%, L-E-56%, L-SP-31%, p<0.001). L-SP women were more likely than white, AA or L-E women to have decisional regret (35% vs. 7%, 15%, 16%, respectively, p<0.001). Multivariate regression showed that Latina ethnicity and low literacy were independently associated with both low decisional satisfaction and high decisional regret (p<0.001). Conclusions: Latina women, especially Spanish speakers, report more dissatisfaction with the breast cancer surgical treatment decision-making process than other racial/ethnic groups. These results highlight the challenges to improving breast cancer treatment informed decision making for Latina women. Future interventions to improve satisfaction with the decision process should be tailored to ethnicity and acculturation.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Why do women get mastectomy? Results from a population-based study

605

Background: Persistently high rates of mastectomy (M) use for breast cancer have motivated lingering concerns about over-treatment. Yet, little information exists about the etiology of current rates of M. Methods: 2,030 women with non- metastatic breast cancer diagnosed from August 2005 to May 2006 and reported to the LA County SEER registry were identified and mailed a survey shortly after receipt of surgical treatment. Latina and African American women were over-sampled. Survey data were merged to SEER data. We report results on a 50% respondent sample (n=736) which will be updated based on a final respondent sample of 1400 patients (projected response rate, 72%). Results: M was ultimately performed in 279 women (37.9%): 47.3% (n=132) received initial M based on surgeon recommendation and most (80.8%) reported a clinical contraindication to breast conserving surgery (BCS); 69 patients (24.7%) chose M despite a surgeon recommendation for BCS or no recommendation favoring either procedure; and 28.0% (n=78) received M after initial attempts at BCS. This latter group included 16 of 22 patients who attempted BCS in spite of a surgeon recommendation for M. The failure rate of BCS in patients thought to be candidates for the procedure was 12.6%. One quarter of patients who received an initial recommendation for M sought a second opinion, and 80.6% reported concordance in recommendation for M between their first and second surgeons. Conclusions: Receipt of M in this large population sample was the result of clinical contraindications to BCS and, to a lesser extent, patient preference. The infrequent discordance in surgical opinions about the need for M and infrequent conversion to M in patients selected for BCS suggest that surgeons have accepted BCS and recognize standard contraindications to the procedure. Initiatives to improve surgical treatment decision-making should focus on patient perspectives about risk and benefits of surgical options and clinicopathologic features predictive of the success of re-excision after initial attempt at BCS.

[Table: see text]

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Surgeon specialization and patient satisfaction with breast cancer treatment

11012

Background: Experience and practice setting vary greatly among surgeons who treat patients with breast cancer. Yet, little is known about how these factors influence patient outcomes such as patient satisfaction with aspects of care. Methods: All women with DCIS and a 20% random sample of women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2002 and reported to the Detroit and Los Angeles metropolitan SEER registries were identified and surveyed shortly after receipt of surgical treatment. Attending surgeons were identified primarily using pathology reports and mailed a survey. The final sample contained complete dyad information for 64.6% of patients (n=1,539) and 69.7% of surgeons (n=318). Logistic regression was used to examine the associations between surgeon specialization (% of practice devoted to breast disease) and treating hospital cancer program status (no program, American College of Surgeons approved cancer program, or NCI cancer center) with four domains of patient satisfaction: 1) the surgical decision, 2) decision-making process, 3) surgeon-patient relationship, and 4) surgeon-patient communication, adjusting for patient and surgeon demographics and disease stage. Results: 34.5%, 32.5% and 33.0% of patients were treated by surgeons who devoted <30% (low volume), 30%-60% (medium volume), and >60% (high volume) of their practice to breast disease. Compared to patients who were treated by low volume surgeons, patients treated by medium or high volume surgeons were more satisfied with the decision making process (medium volume: OR=1.2, 95%CI 0.8–1.7, high volume: OR=1.8, 95% CI 1.1- 2.8, p=0.036) and more satisfied with the surgeon-patient relationship (medium volume: OR=1.1, 95% CI 0.7 - 1.7, high volume: OR=2.1, 95% CI 1.1–3.7, p=0.053). Similar trends were observed for the other domains of satisfaction. Treatment setting was not associated with patient satisfaction after controlling for other factors. Conclusions: Surgeon specialization, but not treatment setting, was associated with patient satisfaction. Examining the processes underlying these associations could inform strategies to improve the quality of breast cancer care.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Correlates of patient referral to surgeons for treatment of breast cancer

6032

Background: Characteristics of surgeons and their practice settings have been associated with cancer treatments and outcomes. Yet, there is little information about factors that are associated with referral pathways to surgeons and treatment settings. Methods: We merged and analyzed tumor registry and survey data from all women with DCIS and a 20% random sample of women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed in 2002 and reported to the Detroit and Los Angeles SEER registries (N = 1,844, response rate 77.4%,) and their surgeons (N = 365, response rate 80.0%). Results: About half of the patients (54.2%) reported that they were referred to their surgeon by another provider or health plan; 20.3% reported that they selected their surgeon; 21.9% reported that they both were referred and were involved in selecting their surgeon; and the remaining patients (4.9%) reported that they had a prior relationship with their surgeon primarily through previous surgery. Selecting their surgeon based on reputation was more frequently reported by white patients (36.5% vs 26.5%, p < .001), and more highly educated patients (40.0% and 21.6%, respectively for highest and lowest education categories, p < .001). Patients who selected their surgeon based on reputation were more likely to have received treatment from a high volume surgeon (adjusted odds ratio 2.3; 95% CI 1.7, 3.2) and more likely to have been treated in an American College of Surgeon approved cancer program or NCI-designated cancer center (adjusted odds ratio 1.8; 95% CI 1.1, 2.8; 3.0 95% CI 1.6, 5.3, respectively). Patients who were referred to their surgeon were less likely to be treated in an NCI-designated cancer center (adjusted OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2, 0.8). Conclusions: Women with breast cancer who actively participate in the surgeon selection process are more likely to be treated by more experienced surgeons and in hospitals with approved cancer programs. Patients should be aware that provider or health plan-based referral may not connect them with the most experienced surgeon or comprehensive practice setting in their community. An active patient role in the surgeon selection process has important implications for both the type of treatment received and where care is delivered.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Patient and surgeon correlates of shared decision making for surgical breast cancer treatment

6031

Background: The choice of surgical breast cancer treatment represents an opportunity for shared decision making (SDM), since both mastectomy and breast conserving surgery are viable options. Yet women vary in their desire for involvement in this decision. Correlates of SDM and/or the level of involvement in breast cancer surgical treatment decision-making are not known. Methods: Breast cancer patients of Detroit and Los Angeles SEER registries were mailed a questionnaire shortly after diagnosis in 2002 (N = 1,800, RR: 77%). Their responses were merged with a surgeon survey (N = 456, RR: 80%) for a dataset of 1,547 patients of 318 surgeons. Surgical treatment decision making was categorized into: 1) surgeon-based; 2) shared; or 3) patient-based. The concordance between a woman’s self-reported actual and desired decisional involvement was categorized as having more, less, or the right amount of involvement. Decision making and concordance were each analyzed as three-level dependent variables using multinomial logistic regression controlling for clustering within surgeons. Independent variables included patient clinical, treatment and demographic factors, surgeon demographic and practice-related factors, and a measure of surgeon-patient communication. Results: 37% of women reported the surgery decision was shared, 25% that it was surgeon-based, and 38% that it was patient-based. Two-thirds experienced the right amount of involvement, while 13% had less and 19% had more. Compared to women who reported a shared decision, those with surgeon-based decision were significantly (p < 0.05) more likely to have male surgeons, and those reporting a patient-based decision were more likely to have received mastectomy vs. breast conserving surgery. Women who were less involved in the surgery decision than they wanted were younger and had less education, while those with more involvement (vs. the right amount) more often had male surgeons. Patient-surgeon communication was associated with decisional involvement. Conclusions: Correlates of SDM and decisional involvement relating to surgical breast cancer treatment differ. Determining patients’ desired role in decision making may as important as achieving a shared decision for evaluating perceived quality of care.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Disability and quality of life impact of mental disorders in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

This manuscript examines the impact of mental health state and specific mental and physical disorders on work role disability and quality of life in six European countries.

METHOD

The ESEMeD study was conducted in: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. Individuals aged 18 years and over who were not institutionalized were eligible for an in-home computer-assisted interview. Common mental disorders, work loss days (WLD) in the past month and quality of life (QoL) were assessed, using the WMH-2000 version of the CIDI, the WHODAS-II, and the mental and physical component scores (MCS, PCS) of the 12-item short form, respectively. The presence of five chronic physical disorders: arthritis, heart disease, lung disease, diabetes and neurological disease was also assessed. Multivariate regression techniques were used to identify the independent association of mental and physical disorders while controlling for gender, age and country.

RESULTS

In each country, WLD and loss of QoL increased with the number of disorders. Most mental disorders had approximately 1.0 SD-unit lower mean MCS and lost three to four times more work days, compared with people without any 12-month mental disorder. The 10 disorders with the highest independent impact on WLD were: neurological disease, panic disorder, PTSD, major depressive episode, dysthymia, specific phobia, social phobia, arthritis, agoraphobia and heart disease. The impact of mental vs. physical disorders on QoL was specific, with mental disorders impacting more on MCS and physical disorders more on PCS. Compared to physical disorders, mental disorders had generally stronger 'cross-domain' effects.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that mental disorders are important determinants of work role disability and quality of life, often outnumbering the impact of common chronic physical disorders.

Use of mental health services in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

Comprehensive information about access and patterns of use of mental health services in Europe is lacking. We present the first results of the use of health services for mental disorders in six European countries as part of the ESEMeD project.

METHOD

The study was conducted in: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. Individuals aged 18 years and over who were not institutionalized were eligible for an computer-assisted interview done at home. The 21 425 participants were asked to report how frequently they consulted formal health services due to their emotions or mental health, the type of professional they consulted and the treatment they received as a result of their consultation in the previous year.

RESULTS

An average of 6.4% of the total sample had consulted formal health services in the previous 12 months. Of the participants with a 12-month mental disorder, 25.7% had consulted a formal health service during that period. This proportion was higher for individuals with a mood disorder (36.5%, 95% CI 32.5-40.5) than for those with anxiety disorders (26.1%, 95% CI 23.1-29.1). Among individuals with a 12-month mental disorder who had contacted the health services 12 months previously, approximately two-thirds had contacted a mental health professional. Among those with a 12-month mental disorder consulting formal health services, 21.2% received no treatment.

CONCLUSION

The ESEMeD results suggest that the use of health services is limited among individuals with mental disorders in the European countries studied. The factors associated with this limited access and their implications deserve further research.

Psychotropic drug utilization in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

To assess psychotropic drug utilization in the general population of six European countries, and the pattern of use in individuals with different DSM-IV diagnoses of 12-month mental disorders.

METHOD

Data were derived from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000), a cross-sectional psychiatric epidemiological study in a representative sample of 21 425 adults aged 18 or older from six European countries (e.g. Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain). Individuals were asked about any psychotropic drug use in the past 12 months, even if they used the drug(s) just once. A colour booklet containing high-quality pictures of psychotropic drugs commonly used to treat mental disorders was provided to help respondents recall drug use.

RESULTS

Psychotropic drug utilization is generally low in individuals with any 12-month mental disorder (32.6%). The extent of psychotropic drug utilization varied according to the specific DSM-IV diagnosis. Among individuals with a 12-month diagnosis of pure major depression, only 21.2% had received any antidepressants within the same period; the exclusive use of antidepressants was even lower (4.6%), while more individuals took only anxiolytics (18.4%).

CONCLUSION

These data question the appropriateness of current pharmacological treatments, particularly for major depression, in which under-treatment is coupled with the high use of non-specific medications, such as anxiolytics.

Prevalence of mental disorders in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

To describe the 12-month and lifetime prevalence rates of mood, anxiety and alcohol disorders in six European countries.

METHOD

A representative random sample of non-institutionalized inhabitants from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain aged 18 or older (n = 21425) were interviewed between January 2001 and August 2003. DSM-IV disorders were assessed by lay interviewers using a revised version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI).

RESULTS

Fourteen per cent reported a lifetime history of any mood disorder, 13.6% any anxiety disorder and 5.2% a lifetime history of any alcohol disorder. More than 6% reported any anxiety disorder, 4.2% any mood disorder, and 1.0% any alcohol disorder in the last year. Major depression and specific phobia were the most common single mental disorders. Women were twice as likely to suffer 12-month mood and anxiety disorders as men, while men were more likely to suffer alcohol abuse disorders.

CONCLUSION

ESEMeD is the first study to highlight the magnitude of mental disorders in the six European countries studied. Mental disorders were frequent, more common in female, unemployed, disabled persons, or persons who were never married or previously married. Younger persons were also more likely to have mental disorders, indicating an early age of onset for mood, anxiety and alcohol disorders.

Sampling and methods of the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

The European Study of Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project was designed to evaluate the prevalence, the impact and the treatment patterns in Europe. This paper presents an overview of the methods implemented in the project.

METHOD

ESEMeD is a cross-sectional study in a representative sample of 21 425 adults, 18 or older, from the general population of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. The Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI) was administered by home interviews from January 2001 to August 2003 using Computer Assisted Personal Interview (CAPI) technology. Data quality was controlled to ensure reliability and validity of the information obtained.

RESULTS

Response rate varied from 78.6% in Spain to 45.9% in France. Less than 4% of the individuals had errors in the checking procedures performed.

CONCLUSION

The sampling methodologies, comprehensive psychiatric instruments and quality control procedures used have rendered the ESEMeD database a unique and important source of information about the prevalence, the disability burden and unmet medical needs of mental disorders within Europe.

12-Month comorbidity patterns and associated factors in Europe: results from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD) project

OBJECTIVE

Comorbidity patterns of 12-month mood, anxiety and alcohol disorders and socio-demographic factors associated with comorbidity were studied among the general population of six European countries.

METHOD

Data were derived from the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD), a cross-sectional psychiatric epidemiological study in a representative sample of adults aged 18 years or older in Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain. The diagnostic instrument used was the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (WMH-CIDI). Data are based on 21 425 completed interviews.

RESULTS

In general, high associations were found within the separate anxiety disorders and between mood and anxiety disorders. Lowest comorbidity associations were found for specific phobia and alcohol abuse-the disorders with the least functional disabilities. Comorbidity patterns were consistent cross-nationally. Associated factors for comorbidity of mood and anxiety disorders were female gender, younger age, lower educational level, higher degree of urbanicity, not living with a partner and unemployment. Only younger people were at greater risk for comorbidity of alcohol disorder with mood, anxiety disorders or both.

CONCLUSION

High levels of comorbidity are found in the general population. Comorbidity is more common in specific groups. To reduce psychiatric burden, early intervention in populations with a primary disorder is important to prevent comorbidity.

A national study of the quantity and cost of informal caregiving for the elderly with stroke

BACKGROUND

As the US population ages, increased stroke incidence will result in higher stroke-associated costs. Although estimates of direct costs exist, little information is available regarding informal caregiving costs for stroke patients.

OBJECTIVE

To determine a nationally representative estimate of the quantity and cost of informal caregiving for stroke.

METHODS

The authors used data from the first wave of the Asset and Health Dynamics (AHEAD) Study, a longitudinal study of people over 70, to determine average weekly hours of informal caregiving. Two-part multivariable regression analyses were used to determine the likelihood of receiving informal care and the quantity of caregiving hours for those with stroke, after adjusting for important covariates. Average annual cost for informal caregiving was calculated.

RESULTS

Of 7,443 respondents, 656 (8.8%) reported a history of stroke. Of those, 375 (57%) reported stroke-related health problems (SRHP). After adjusting for cormorbid conditions, potential caregiver networks, and sociodemographics, the proportion of persons receiving informal care increased with stroke severity, and there was an association of weekly caregiving hours with stroke +/- SRHP (p < 0.01). Using the median 1999 home health aide wage (8.20 dollars/hour) as the value for family caregiver time, the expected yearly caregiving cost per stroke ranged from 3,500 dollars to 8,200 dollars. Using conservative prevalence estimates from the AHEAD sample (750,000 US elderly patients with stroke but no SRHP and 1 million with stroke and SRHP), this would result in an annual cost of up to 6.1 billion dollars for stroke-related informal caregiving in the United States.

CONCLUSIONS

Informal caregiving-associated costs are substantial and should be considered when estimating the cost of stroke treatment.

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) project: rationale and methods

The European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders (ESEMeD/MHEDEA 2000) is a new cross-sectional study investigating the prevalence and the associated factors of mental disorders, as well as their effect on health-related quality of life and the use of services in six European countries. This paper describes the rationale, methods and the plan for the analysis of the project. A total of 22,000 individuals representative of the non-institutionalized population aged 18 and over from Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain are being interviewed in their homes. Trained interviewers use a computer-assisted personal interview (CAPI) including the most recent version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI, 2000), a well-established epidemiological survey for assessing mental disorders. This is the first international study using the standardized up-to-date methodology for epidemiological assessment. Sizeable differences in prevalence, impact and level of need that is met by the health services are expected. The analysis of these differences should facilitate the monitoring of ongoing mental health reform initiatives in Europe and provide new research hypotheses.

A randomized controlled trial comparing three invitation strategies in a breast cancer screening program

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to compare the response received by a population-based breast cancer screening program, according to three different invitation strategies: letters sent by mail from the program (program group), letters sent by mail from the Primary Health Care Team (PHT group), and direct contact through a trained professional (direct contact group).

METHODS

We used a cluster-randomized controlled trial with assignment to invitation group using home address. Nine hundred eighty-six women of Barcelona (Spain), ages 50 to 64 years, were invited to participate in the program. The main outcome used was the response rate after the first invitation.

RESULTS

Five hundred sixty-four women accepted the invitation (57.2%). The highest response rate was achieved in the direct contact group (63.5%), followed by the PHT group (55.6%), the program group being the one that attained the lowest response rate (52.1%). The direct contact group had a higher probability of participating than the PHT group (RR = 1.14, P = 0.037) or the program group (RR = 1.22, P = 0.003). The response rate in the direct contact group was 72.1% when the letter was received by the subject herself. The increase in response occurred particularly among women of lower educational level.

CONCLUSIONS

Inviting women to participate in a breast cancer screening program through direct contact by trained personnel increased participation rate compared with mailed-letter methods. The positive effect appeared restricted to women with lower educational levels.

Mammography messages in popular media: implications for patient expectations and shared clinical decision-making

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between the quantity and content of information about mammography in popular magazines and the educational level of their target audience.

DESIGN

Articles published in popular magazines from January 1988 through April 1994 in which >or= 25% of all readers were females >or= 35 years of age were identified (n=65). We used the proportion of readers who were college graduates to stratify the magazines into three education levels. We used a content analysis to assess the relationship between media messages about mammography and readers' education levels.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight percent of lowest education level articles were categorized as persuasive or prescriptive compared with 28% of articles in the highest education level (P < 0.01). Only 26% of the lowest education level articles that discussed screening guidelines for women under 50 years of age considered the issue controversial, while 59% of the high education level articles considered it controversial (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Women with lower education levels received a clearly persuasive or prescriptive message urging mammography screening, while higher educated women received more balanced and informative messages. Such differences suggest that women may be entering their physicians' offices with very different sets of information from which to draw when faced with clinical decisions. Physicians and other health-care providers should be aware of these potential differences, and further research should be done to explore the relationship between women's preferences for participation in shared decision-making and the types of messages they are receiving from popular media.

Correlates of surgical treatment type for women with noninvasive and invasive breast cancer

There is concern that breast-conserving surgery is underused in some breast cancer patient subpopulations, including women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), an early-stage form of the disease. We conducted a population-based study to identify correlates of surgical treatment type and patient satisfaction, comparing women with DCIS and those with invasive disease. We used telephone interview and mailed survey of 183 women recently diagnosed with breast cancer (oversampling for women with DCIS), identified from the Metropolitan Detroit Cancer Surveillance System (response rate 71.2%). Overall, 52.5% of study subjects received a mastectomy (48.9%, 45.8%, and 73.5% of women with DCIS, local disease, and regional disease, respectively, p < 0.05). One third of women did not perceive that they were given a choice between surgical types, and an additional one third of women received a surgeon recommendation, most of whom received the treatment recommended. Patient attitudes, such as concerns about the clinical benefits and risks of specific surgery options, were important correlates of treatment choice but did not vary by stage of disease. Knowledge about differences in clinical benefits and risks between surgery options was low. Finally, satisfaction with the decision-making process was significantly lower in women who did not perceive a choice between surgery options. Correlates of breast cancer surgery type appeared to be similar for women with DCIS and invasive breast cancer, with surgeons playing a dominant role in the process. Results also suggested that the decision-making process may be as important for patient satisfaction as the treatment chosen.

Estimating the cost of informal caregiving for elderly patients with cancer

PURPOSE

As the United States population ages, the increasing prevalence of cancer is likely to result in higher direct medical and nonmedical costs. Although estimates of the associated direct medical costs exist, very little information is available regarding the prevalence, time, and cost associated with informal caregiving for elderly cancer patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To estimate these costs, we used data from the first wave (1993) of the Asset and Health Dynamics (AHEAD) Study, a nationally representative longitudinal survey of people aged 70 or older. Using a multivariable, two-part regression model to control for differences in health and functional status, social support, and sociodemographics, we estimated the probability of receiving informal care, the average weekly number of caregiving hours, and the average annual caregiving cost per case (assuming an average hourly wage of $8.17) for subjects who reported no history of cancer (NC), having a diagnosis of cancer but not receiving treatment for their cancer in the last year (CNT), and having a diagnosis of cancer and receiving treatment in the last year (CT).

RESULTS

Of the 7,443 subjects surveyed, 6,422 (86%) reported NC, 718 (10%) reported CNT, and 303 (4%) reported CT. Whereas the adjusted probability of informal caregiving for those respondents reporting NC and CNT was 26%, it was 34% for those reporting CT (P <.05). Those subjects reporting CT received an average of 10.0 hours of informal caregiving per week, as compared with 6.9 and 6.8 hours for those who reported NC and CNT, respectively (P <.05). Accordingly, cancer treatment was associated with an incremental increase of 3.1 hours per week, which translates into an additional average yearly cost of $1,200 per patient and just over $1 billion nationally.

CONCLUSION

Informal caregiving costs are substantial and should be considered when estimating the cost of cancer treatment in the elderly.