Trends in Attaining Mammography Quality Benchmarks With Repeated Participation in a Quality Measurement Program: Going Beyond the Mammography Quality Standards Act to Address Breast Cancer Disparities

Racial Differences in Breast Cancer Survival Between Black and White Women According to Tumor Subtype: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

Despite effective early-detection approaches and innovative treatments, Black women in the United States have higher breast cancer mortality rates compared with White women. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the extent of disparities in breast cancer survival between Black and White women according to tumor subtype.

METHODS

A comprehensive database search was performed for full-text, English-language articles published from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2022. Included studies compared survival between Black and White female patients with breast cancer within subtypes defined by hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)/neu (HER2; now known as ERBB2) status. Random-effects models were used to combine study-specific results and generate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs for breast cancer-specific or overall survival (OS). A protocol for this review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021268212).

RESULTS

Eighteen studies including 228,885 (34,262 Black; 182,466 White) patients with breast cancer were identified. Compared with White women, Black women had a higher risk of breast cancer death for all tumor subtypes. The summary risk of breast cancer death was 50% higher among hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative [HER2-] tumors (RR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.30 to 1.72]), 34% higher for hormone receptor+/HER2+ (RR, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.64]), 20% higher for hormone receptor-negative (-)/HER2+ (RR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.43]), and 17% higher among individuals with hormone receptor-/HER2- tumors (hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.25). Black women also had poorer OS than White women for all subtypes.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest there are both subtype-specific and subtype-independent mechanisms that contribute to disparities in breast cancer survival between Black and White women, which require multilevel interventions to address and achieve health equity.

Timeliness of Breast Diagnostic Imaging and Biopsy in Practice: 15 Years of Collecting, Comparing, and Defining Quality Breast Cancer Care

BACKGROUND

The literature lacks well-established benchmarks for expected time between screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and then to core needle breast biopsy.

METHODS

Timeliness of diagnostic imaging workup was evaluated using aggregate data from 2005 to 2019 submitted to The National Quality Measures for Breast Centers (NQMBC).

RESULTS

A total of 419 breast centers submitted data for 1,805,515 patients on the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging. The overall time was 7 days with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentile values of 5, 10, and 13.5 days, respectively. The average time in business days decreased from 9.1 to 7.1 days (p < 0.001) over the study period with the greatest gains in poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers and centers in the Midwest had significantly shorter time to diagnostic imaging. Time from diagnostic imaging to core needle biopsy was submitted by 406 facilities representing 386,077 patients. The average time was 6 business days, with 75th, 25th, and 10th percentiles of 4, 9, and 13.7 days, respectively. Time to biopsy improved from a mean of 9.0 to 6.3 days (p < 0.001) with the most improvement in the poorest-performing quartiles. Screening centers, centers in the Midwest, and centers in metropolitan areas had significantly shorter time to biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In a robust dataset, the time from screening mammogram to diagnostic imaging and from diagnostic imaging to biopsy decreased from 2005 to 2019. On average, patients could expect to have diagnostic imaging and biopsies within 1 week of abnormal results. Monitoring and comparing performance with reported data may improve quality in breast care.

Racial disparities in the screening mammography continuum within a heterogeneous health care system

BACKGROUND

Decreased mammography drives breast cancer disparities. Black women have lower rates of mammography completion than White women, and this contributes to disparities in outcomes. Points of disparity along the continuum for screening mammography remain underresearched.

METHODS

The authors compared mammography referrals for Black and White women aged 40-74 years at a heterogeneous academic medical center. Completion of steps of the screening mammography continuum was compared between Black and White women within two age cohorts: 40-49 and 50-74 years. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between race and mammogram completion.

RESULTS

Among 26,476 women, 3090 (12%) were Black, and 23,386 (88%) were White. Among Black women aged 50-74 years who were due for mammography, 40% had referrals, 39% were scheduled, and 21% completed mammography; the corresponding values for White women were 42%, 41%, and 27%, respectively. Similar differences in referral outcomes were noted for women aged 40-49 years, although Black women had lower rates of provider-initiated referrals (9% vs. 13%). Adjusted analyses for those aged 40-49 and 50-74 years demonstrated an association between Black race and lower rates of mammography completion (odds ratio [OR] for 40-49 years, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.57-0.95; p = .02; OR for 50-74 years, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.74-0.98; p = .02). In multivariable analyses, noncommercial insurance and higher comorbidity were associated with lower rates of mammography. Provider-initiated referral was positively correlated to mammogram completion.

CONCLUSIONS

Black race was associated with 15%-26% lower mammography completion (adjusted). Both groups experienced the highest attrition after scheduling mammograms, although attrition was more precipitous for Black women. These findings have implications for future interventions, including increasing provider-initiated referrals and decreasing barriers to attending scheduled mammograms.

Quality assurance in Mammography: An overview

Since 1989, hundreds of thousands of lives have been saved worldwide by the widespread use of screening mammography alongside new developments in breast cancer treatment [1]. The ability of screening mammography to detect cancer early, when treatment is most effective, is optimized when it is performed in the highest quality manner and accessed by all eligible candidates. Currently, worldwide, there are over 14 guidance documents for mammographic quality [2]. Some countries, such as the United Kingdom (UK), monitor quality through a national screening program. In the United States (US), where 39 million mammograms are performed annually [3], there is not a national screening program, but the federal government mandates minimum quality standards for the performance of mammography. Among a consortium of European countries, the European Reference Organisation for Quality Assured Breast Screening and Diagnostic Services (EUREF) promotes voluntary adherence to European mammography quality standards. Setting quality standards at national or international levels ensures the uniformity of practice and identifies substandard practices in need of improvement, ultimately maximizing the benefit of screening mammography.