Cost implications of unwarranted imaging for distant metastasis in women with early-stage breast cancer in Ontario

Cost of Low-Value Imaging Worldwide: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Imaging with low or no benefit for the patient undermines the quality of care and amounts to vast opportunity costs. More than 3.6 billion imaging examinations are performed annually, and about 20-50% of these are of low value. This study aimed to synthesize knowledge of the costs of low-value imaging worldwide.

METHODS

This systematic review was based on the PRISMA statement. The database search was developed in Medline and further adapted to Embase-Ovid, Cochrane Library, and Scopus. Primary empirical studies assessing the costs of low-value diagnostic imaging were included if published between 2012 and March 2022. Studies designed as randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive studies, cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, and mixed-methods studies were eligible. The analysis was descriptive.

RESULTS

Of 5,567 records identified, 106 were included. Most of the studies included were conducted in the USA (n = 76), and a hospital or medical center was the most common setting (n = 82). Thirty-eight of the included studies calculated the costs of multiple imaging modalities; in studies with only one imaging modality included, conventional radiography was the most common (n = 32). Aggregated costs for low-value examinations amounts to billions of dollars per year globally. Initiatives to reduce low-value imaging may reduce costs by up to 95% without harming patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first systematic review of the cost of low-value imaging worldwide, documenting a high potential for cost reduction. Given the universal challenges with resource allocation, the large amount used for low-value imaging represents a vast opportunity cost and offers great potential to improve the quality and efficiency of care.

Clinical Impact of ASCO Choosing Wisely Guidelines on Staging Imaging for Early-Stage Breast Cancers: A Time Series Analysis Using SEER-Medicare Data

PURPOSE

American Society for Clinical Oncology released the Choosing Wisely list in 2012, highlighting low-value procedures that lack evidence, advising against the use of positron emission tomography, computerized tomography, and radionuclide bone scans for the staging of early-stage breast cancer at low risk for metastasis. The objective of the study was to assess the impact of the American Society of Clinical Oncology Choosing Wisely guidelines on inappropriate staging imaging among early-stage breast cancers.

METHODS

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program-Medicare data set was used to identify 50,004 women age 66 years and older with new incident diagnosis of early-stage breast cancer (stage 0 through stage 2a; T < 4, N = 0, and M = 0). The primary outcome was the incidence of patients with inappropriate imaging following an early-stage breast cancer diagnosis. The primary outcome was identified within 6 months of the first diagnosis. An interrupted time series analysis using negative binomial regression was performed for outpatient claims for these diagnostic studies versus the two interruptions of guidelines release and guidelines reinforcement. Mean images per patient, percent change for the study period, and rate of change per year were calculated.

RESULTS

Imaging rates fell by a modest 2.32% following guidelines release in April 2012 (point estimate = -2.32%; 95% CI, -6.34% to 1.88%). By contrast, imaging rates fell by a four-fold larger amount (point estimate = -9.36%; 95% CI, -13.20% to -5.35%) following guidelines published reminders in journals (or reinforcement) in October 2013. Mean imaging studies per patient (95% CI) declined from 1.80 (1.76 to 1.84) in January 2012 to 1.50 (1.48 to 1.53) by January 2015, representing a 16% decline in imaging overuse in 2015 compared with 3 years earlier. The rate of change (95% CI) in images per patient was initially small at -0.47% (-4.27% to 3.33%) per year between April 2012 and October 2013, but almost eight times faster at -3.70% (-5.81% to -1.60%) per year after October 2013.

CONCLUSION

This analysis demonstrates a substantial decrease in the prevalence of imaging overuse in early-stage breast cancers correlating with the 2013 reinforcement of American Society of Clinical Oncology's 2012 Choosing Wisely guidelines. The creation and dissemination of such resources serves as a powerful tool to improve clinical practice, cost-effectiveness, and patient safety from secondary malignancies, anxiety, and overdiagnosis.

Perspectives on the Systemic Staging in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is a complex disease, and accurate systemic staging is an essential aspect of the evaluation of a patient with newly diagnosed breast cancer. Considering that the chance of having metastatic disease at breast cancer diagnosis is different in each patient and depends on a variety of anatomic and biologic factors, it is crucial to understand that some populations may benefit from more intensive staging because their pretest probability of metastatic disease is higher than that of the average patient. Identifying these patients with de novo stage IV breast cancer is associated with substantial prognostic and therapeutic implications. Unfortunately, recent advances in understanding breast cancer heterogeneity and molecular biology have not been incorporated in the international guidelines and recommendations about imaging examinations for detecting de novo metastatic breast cancer. This review article discusses important issues regarding the rationale for performing systemic staging, addresses current and innovative imaging methods, and proposes an algorithm for systemic staging in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.

Unwarranted imaging for distant metastases in patients with newly diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ and stage I and II breast cancer

Background

In 2012, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) released a Choosing Wisely Top Five list that included a recommendation against ordering advanced imaging tests to screen for metastases among asymptomatic patients with early breast cancer. Our provincial breast cancer staging guideline was subsequently updated. We report on the use of unwarranted bone scanning (BS), computed tomography (CT), nonbreast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) among women diagnosed with stage 0–II breast cancer in Alberta in 2011–2015.

Methods

The cohort was retrospectively ascertained from the Alberta Cancer Registry. We used additional provincial data sources to obtain information about diagnostic imaging tests completed from biopsy to surgical date plus 4 months. The reason for each BS, CT, MRI and PET was abstracted. We calculated the frequency of advanced imaging tests completed for routine metastatic screening.

Results

Of 10 142 patients included, 2887 (28.5%) had at least 1 advanced imaging test completed for routine metastatic screening. Of these 2887 patients, 438 (15.2%) had a follow-up BS, CT, MRI or PET, and 28 patients (1.0%) had a nonbreast imageguided biopsy. Use of routine advanced imaging tests did not change clearly over time.

Conclusion

Our results demonstrate persistent use of advanced imaging tests for routine metastatic screening among patients with stage 0–II breast cancer despite the release of the ASCO Choosing Wisely recommendations and the update of our provincial breast cancer staging guideline. Investigation of strategies for guideline translation to improve upon value-based care of patients with early breast cancer is warranted.

Factors associated with imaging in patients with early breast cancer after initial treatment

Background

Overuse of surveillance imaging in patients after curative treatment for early breast cancer (ebc) was recently identified as one of the Choosing Wisely Canada initiatives to improve the quality of cancer care. We undertook a population-level examination of imaging practices in Ontario as they existed before the launch of that initiative.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with ebc between 2006 and 2010 in Ontario were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry. Records were linked deterministically to provincial health care databases to obtain comprehensive follow-up. We identified all advanced imaging exams [aies: computed tomography (ct), bone scan, positron-emission tomography] and basic imaging exams (bies: ultrasonography, chest radiography) occurring within the first 2 years after curative treatment. Poisson regression was used to assess associations between patient or provider characteristics and the rate of aies.

Results

Of 30,006 women with ebc, 58.6% received at least 1 bie, and 30.6% received at least 1 aie in year 1 after treatment. In year 2, 52.7% received at least 1 bie, and 25.7% received at least 1 aie. The most common aies were chest cts and bone scans. The rate of aies increased with older age, higher disease stage, comorbidity, chemotherapy exposure, and prior staging investigations (p < 0.001). Imaging was ordered mainly by medical oncologists (38%), followed by primary care physicians (23%), surgeons (13%), and emergency room physicians (7%).

Conclusions

Despite recommendations against its use, imaging is common in ebc survivors. Understanding the factors associated with aie use helps to identify areas for further research and is required to lower imaging rates and to improve survivorship care.

A Statewide Intervention Improves Appropriate Imaging in Localized Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

We implemented a statewide intervention to improve imaging utilization for the staging of patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative) is a quality improvement collaborative comprising 42 diverse practices representing approximately 85% of the urologists in Michigan. MUSIC has developed imaging appropriateness criteria (prostate specific antigen greater than 20 ng/ml, Gleason score 7 or higher and clinical stage T3 or higher) which minimize unnecessary imaging with bone scan and computerized tomography. After baseline rates of radiographic staging were established in 2012 and 2013, we used multidimensional interventions to deploy these criteria in 2014. Imaging utilization was then remeasured in 2015 to evaluate for changes in practice patterns.

RESULTS

A total of 10,554 newly diagnosed patients with prostate cancer were entered into the MUSIC registry from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2013 and January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015. Of these patients 7,442 (79%) and 7,312 (78%) met our criteria to avoid bone scan and computerized tomography imaging, respectively. The use of bone scan imaging when not indicated decreased from 11.0% at baseline to 6.5% after interventions (p <0.0001). The use of computerized tomography when not indicated decreased from 14.7% at baseline to 7.7% after interventions (p <0.0001). Variability among practices decreased substantially after the interventions as well. The use of recommended imaging remained stable during these periods.

CONCLUSIONS

An intervention aimed at appropriate use of imaging was associated with decreased use of bone scans and computerized tomography among men at low risk for metastases.