101
|
Beaber EF, Kim JJ, Schapira MM, Tosteson ANA, Zauber AG, Geiger AM, Kamineni A, Weaver DL, Tiro JA. Unifying screening processes within the PROSPR consortium: a conceptual model for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:djv120. [PMID: 25957378 PMCID: PMC4838064 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djv120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 69] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/10/2014] [Revised: 02/18/2015] [Accepted: 04/03/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
General frameworks of the cancer screening process are available, but none directly compare the process in detail across different organ sites. This limits the ability of medical and public health professionals to develop and evaluate coordinated screening programs that apply resources and population management strategies available for one cancer site to other sites. We present a trans-organ conceptual model that incorporates a single screening episode for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers into a unified framework based on clinical guidelines and protocols; the model concepts could be expanded to other organ sites. The model covers four types of care in the screening process: risk assessment, detection, diagnosis, and treatment. Interfaces between different provider teams (eg, primary care and specialty care), including communication and transfer of responsibility, may occur when transitioning between types of care. Our model highlights across each organ site similarities and differences in steps, interfaces, and transitions in the screening process and documents the conclusion of a screening episode. This model was developed within the National Cancer Institute-funded consortium Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR). PROSPR aims to optimize the screening process for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer and includes seven research centers and a statistical coordinating center. Given current health care reform initiatives in the United States, this conceptual model can facilitate the development of comprehensive quality metrics for cancer screening and promote trans-organ comparative cancer screening research. PROSPR findings will support the design of interventions that improve screening outcomes across multiple cancer sites.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elisabeth F Beaber
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT).
| | - Jane J Kim
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Marilyn M Schapira
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Anna N A Tosteson
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Ann G Zauber
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Ann M Geiger
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Aruna Kamineni
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Donald L Weaver
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| | - Jasmin A Tiro
- : Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA (EFB); Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA (JJK); Division of General Internal Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA (MMS); Department of Medicine and The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth and Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH (ANAT); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (AGZ); Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD (AMG); Group Health Research Institute, Seattle, WA (AK); Department of Pathology and University of Vermont Cancer Center, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT (DLW); Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX (JAT)
| |
Collapse
|
102
|
Giovagnoli MR, Bonifacino A, Neglia C, Benvenuto M, Sambati FV, Giolli L, Giovagnoli A, Piscitelli P. Diagnostic and therapeutic path of breast cancer: effectiveness, appropriateness, and costs--results from the DOCMa study. Clin Interv Aging 2015; 10:741-9. [PMID: 25945041 PMCID: PMC4407743 DOI: 10.2147/cia.s75486] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Objective An increase in breast cancer incidence has been documented in Italy and in other countries, and some women decide by themselves to undergo diagnostic examinations outside the official screening campaigns. The aim of this paper was to analyze – in terms of effectiveness, appropriate access, and related costs – the path spontaneously followed by a sample of Italian women for the early diagnosis of breast cancer. Subjects and methods A total of 143 women who consecutively referred themselves to the breast cancer outpatient facilities at the Sant’Andrea University Hospital in Rome from May to June 2007 were enrolled in the study, gave their consent, and were screened according to their individual risk factors for breast cancer. The entire diagnostic and therapeutic path followed in the previous 2 years by each of them, either at Sant’Andrea or in other medical facilities, was reviewed and evaluated in terms of its operative efficiency and fair economic value. Results The subjects’ mean age was 47.5 years (standard deviation 13.6 years); 55% of the women were <50 years old (28% <40 years), and were thus not included in the official screening campaigns; 97 women (70%) were requesting a routine control; and 49% of them had already undergone four to seven examinations before the enrollment, although no major risk factor was present in 73.5%. After enrollment in the study, nine of the patients had surgical interventions performed on them at Sant’Andrea’s, identifying five invasive carcinomas and two ductal in situ carcinomas and two benign lesions. Operative efficiency and fair economic value were found to be optimal only in diagnostic/therapeutic paths followed at Sant’Andrea. Conclusion The diagnostic path at Sant’Andrea’s specialized center for breast cancer diagnosis and therapy is characterized by higher operative efficiency and more sustainable costs than at general hospitals, outpatient facilities run by local health authorities, or private medical centers. This result seems to confirm the present tendency to refer high-risk patients for breast cancer directly to breast units like the one at Sant’Andrea.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Rosaria Giovagnoli
- Department of Clinical and Molecular Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Adriana Bonifacino
- Department of Medical-Surgical Sciences and Translational Medicine, Sapienza University of Rome, Sant'Andrea University Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Cosimo Neglia
- Euro Mediterranean Scientific Biomedical Institute (ISBEM), Brindisi, Italy
| | - Marco Benvenuto
- Euro Mediterranean Scientific Biomedical Institute (ISBEM), Brindisi, Italy ; Department of Economics, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna, Pisa, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Prisco Piscitelli
- Coleman Ltd, Southern Italy Hospital Institute, Naples, Italy ; IOS, Southern Italy Hospital Institute, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
103
|
Tsuchida J, Nagahashi M, Rashid OM, Takabe K, Wakai T. At what age should screening mammography be recommended for Asian women? Cancer Med 2015; 4:1136-44. [PMID: 25914223 PMCID: PMC4529351 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.468] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/15/2015] [Revised: 03/15/2015] [Accepted: 03/29/2015] [Indexed: 01/15/2023] Open
Abstract
Although regular screening mammography has been suggested to be associated with improvements in the relative survival of breast cancer in recent years, the appropriate age to start screening mammography remains controversial. In November 2009, the United States Preventive Service Task Force published updated guidelines for breast cancer, which no longer support routine screening mammography for women aged 40–49 years, but instead, defer the choice of screening in that age group to the patient and physician. The age to begin screening differs between guidelines, including those from the Task Force, the American Cancer Society and the World Health Organization. It remains unclear how this discrepancy impacts patient survival, especially among certain subpopulations. Although the biological characteristics of breast cancer and peak age of incidence differ among different ethnic populations, there have been few reports that evaluate the starting age for screening mammography based on ethnicity. Here, we discuss the benefits and harm of screening mammography in the fifth decade, and re-evaluate the starting age for screening mammography taking ethnicity into account, focusing on the Asian population. Breast cancer incidence peaked in the fifth decade in Asian women, which has been thought to be due to a combination of biological and environmental factors. Previous reports suggest that Asian women in their 40s may receive more benefit and less harm from screening mammography than the age-matched non-Asian US population. Therefore, starting screening mammography at age 40 may be beneficial for women of Asian ethnicity in well-resourced countries, such as Japanese women who reside in Japan.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Junko Tsuchida
- Division of Digestive and General Surgery, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 1-757 Asahimachi-dori, Chuo-Ku, Niigata, 951-8510, Japan
| | - Masayuki Nagahashi
- Division of Digestive and General Surgery, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 1-757 Asahimachi-dori, Chuo-Ku, Niigata, 951-8510, Japan.,Department of Medical Oncology, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 1-757 Asahimachi-dori, Chuo-Ku, Niigata, 951-8510, Japan
| | - Omar M Rashid
- H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive, SRB 4.24012, Tampa, Florida, 33612
| | - Kazuaki Takabe
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine and the Massey Cancer Center, 1200 E. Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia, 23219
| | - Toshifumi Wakai
- Division of Digestive and General Surgery, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 1-757 Asahimachi-dori, Chuo-Ku, Niigata, 951-8510, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
104
|
Pandharipande PV, Heberle C, Dowling EC, Kong CY, Tramontano A, Perzan KE, Brugge W, Hur C. Targeted screening of individuals at high risk for pancreatic cancer: results of a simulation model. Radiology 2015; 275:177-87. [PMID: 25393849 PMCID: PMC4372492 DOI: 10.1148/radiol.14141282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To identify when, from the standpoint of relative risk, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging-based screening may be effective in patients with a known or suspected genetic predisposition to pancreatic cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS The authors developed a Markov model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The model was calibrated to National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry data and informed by the literature. A hypothetical screening strategy was evaluated in which all population individuals underwent one-time MR imaging screening at age 50 years. Screening outcomes for individuals with an average risk for PDAC ("base case") were compared with those for individuals at an increased risk to assess for differential benefits in populations with a known or suspected genetic predisposition. Effects of varying key inputs, including MR imaging performance, surgical mortality, and screening age, were evaluated with a sensitivity analysis. RESULTS In the base case, screening resulted in a small number of cancer deaths averted (39 of 100 000 men, 38 of 100 000 women) and a net decrease in life expectancy (-3 days for men, -4 days for women), which was driven by unnecessary pancreatic surgeries associated with false-positive results. Life expectancy gains were achieved if an individual's risk for PDAC exceeded 2.4 (men) or 2.7 (women) times that of the general population. When relative risk increased further, for example to 30 times that of the general population, averted cancer deaths and life expectancy gains increased substantially (1219 of 100 000 men, life expectancy gain: 65 days; 1204 of 100 000 women, life expectancy gain: 71 days). In addition, results were sensitive to MR imaging specificity and the surgical mortality rate. CONCLUSION Although PDAC screening with MR imaging for the entire population is not effective, individuals with even modestly increased risk may benefit.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Pari V. Pandharipande
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Curtis Heberle
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Emily C. Dowling
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Chung Yin Kong
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Angela Tramontano
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Katherine E. Perzan
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - William Brugge
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| | - Chin Hur
- From the Massachusetts General Hospital Institute for Technology
Assessment (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T., K.E.P., C.H.), Department of
Radiology (P.V.P., C.H., E.C.D., C.Y.K., A.T.), and Department of General Medicine,
Gastrointestinal Unit (K.E.P., W.B., C.H.), Massachusetts General Hospital, 101
Merrimac St, 10th Floor, Boston, MA 02114; and Harvard Medical School, Boston,
Mass
| |
Collapse
|