Clinical Benefits, Harms, and Cost-Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening for Survivors of Childhood Cancer Treated With Chest Radiation : A Comparative Modeling Study

The Children's Oncology Group Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines for Survivors of Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancers: A Review

Importance

Since 2003, the Children's Oncology Group (COG) has developed and disseminated the Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines for Survivors of Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancers. These guidelines have benchmarked the standard of care for long-term survivors of childhood cancer in North America and beyond. Since their inception, they have evolved in depth, scope, and contributors to maintain fidelity toward continually emerging evidence related to cancer survivorship. They are intended to inform care for individuals who survived 2 or more years from completion of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer-directed therapy and receiving care in either specialty or primary care environments. The guidelines are updated on a 5-year cycle, during which comprehensive literature searches pertaining to guideline-specific questions are performed, evidence abstracted from pertinent publications, and recommendations determined and scored following expert deliberation.

Observations

Version 6.0 of the guidelines, released in October 2023, comprised 165 sections and 45 health links and represents the cooperative efforts of 220 individuals. Major changes include the addition of recommendations regarding surveillance for genetic cancer predisposition, surveillance following the use of novel cancer treatment modalities, and routine vaccination practices during long-term follow-up. In addition, surveillance echocardiograms were omitted for those at low risk of cardiomyopathy.

Conclusions and Relevance

This narrative review outlines the historical evolution of the COG Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines for Survivors of Childhood, Adolescent, and Young Adult Cancers, current methods guiding their development, and key recommendations from version 6.0. The guidelines are publicly available in their entirety online. The COG guidelines continue to set the standard for surveillance practices for long-term survivors of childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer. The growing body of evidence supporting these recommendations will continue to guide their evolution to inform optimal survivorship care practices.

Impact of Volumetric Dosimetry on the Projected Cost of Radiation-Related Late Effects Screening After Childhood Cancer: A Real-World Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Screening guidelines for childhood cancer survivors treated with radiation currently rely on broad anatomic irradiated regions (IR) to determine risk for late effects. However, contemporary radiotherapy techniques use volumetric dosimetry (VD) to define organ-specific exposure, which supports more specific screening recommendations that could be less costly.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study of 132 patients treated with irradiation at Children's Hospital Los Angeles from 2000 to 2016. For 5 key organs (cochlea, breast, heart, lung, and colon), radiation exposure was determined retrospectively using both IR and VD methods. Under each method, Children's Oncology Group Long-Term Follow-Up Guidelines were used to identify organs flagged for screening and recommended screening tests. Projected screening costs incurred under each method were computed through age 65 using insurance claims data.

RESULTS

Median age at the end of treatment was 10.6 years (range, 1.4-20.4). Brain tumor was the most common diagnosis (45%) and head/brain the most common irradiated region (61%). For all 5 organs, use of VD rather than IR resulted in fewer recommended screening tests. This led to average cumulative estimated savings of $3769 (P = .099), with significant savings in patients with CNS tumors (P = .012). Among patients with savings, average savings were $9620 per patient (P = .016) and significantly more likely for females than males (P = .027).

CONCLUSION

Use of VD to enhance precision of guideline-based screening for radiation-related late effects permits fewer recommended screening tests and generates cost-savings.

Breast cancer after thoracic radiotherapy in young patients: what does the radiologist need to know?

Radiation-induced secondary tumors constitute a rare complication of radiation therapy and typically occur in or near the irradiated area. Women who undergo thoracic radiotherapy before 30 years of age have a significantly greater lifetime risk of developing breast cancer than do those in the general population. It is recommended that a patient who has previously received thoracic radiotherapy with a radiation dose ≥ 10 Gy subsequently undergo annual screening with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging, beginning eight years after the initial treatment or when the patient has reached 25 years of age (whichever comes later). The treatment of secondary breast cancer in this population should be individualized and should be discussed with a multidisciplinary team to avoid toxicity related to the treatment of the primary cancer.

Breast Cancer Screening in Survivors of Childhood Cancer

Women who survived childhood cancers or cancers at a young age are at high risk for breast cancer later in life. The accentuated risk is notable among those treated at a young age with a high radiation dose but also extends to survivors treated with therapies other than or in addition to radiation therapy. The predisposing risk factors are complex. Advances in radiation therapy continue to curtail exposure, yet the risk of a second cancer has no dose threshold and a long latency period, and concurrent use of chemotherapy may have an additive effect on long-term risk of cancer. Early screening with annual mammography and MRI is recommended for chest radiation exposure of 10 Gy or greater, beginning 8 years after treatment or at age 25 years, whichever is later. However, there is a lack of recommendations for those at high risk without a history of radiation therapy. Because mortality after breast cancer among survivors is higher than in women with de novo breast cancer, and because there is a higher incidence of a second asynchronous breast cancer in survivors than that in the general population, regular screening is essential and is expected to improve mortality. However, awareness and continuity of care may be lacking in these young patients and is reflected in their poor screening attendance. The transition of care from childhood to adulthood for survivors requires age-targeted and lifelong strategies of education and risk prevention that are needed to improve long-term outcomes for these patients. ^© RSNA, 2023 See the invited commentary by Chikarmane in this issue. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center.

How to accurately preoperative screen nipple-sparing mastectomy candidate-a nomogram for predicting nipple-areola complex involvement risk in breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) offers superior cosmetic outcomes and has been gaining wide acceptance. It has always been difficult to objectively quantify the risk of nipple-areola complex involvement (NACi). The goal was to develop a prediction model for clinical application.

METHODS

Patients who had a total mastectomy (TM) between January 2016 and January 2020 at a single institute formed the development cohort (n = 578) and those who had NSM + immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) between January 2020 and January 2021 formed the validation cohort (n = 112). The prediction model was developed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression studies. Based on NACi risk variables identified in the development cohort, a nomogram was created and evaluated in the validation cohort. Meanwhile, stratified analysis was performed based on the model's risk levels and was combined with intraoperative frozen pathology (IFP) to optimize the model.

RESULTS

Tumor central location, clinical tumor size (CTS) > 4.0 cm, tumor-nipple distance (TND) ≤ 1.0 cm, clinical nodal status positive (cN +), and KI-67 ≥ 20% were revealed to be good predictive indicators for NACi. A nomogram based on these major clinicopathologic variables was employed to quantify preoperative NACi risk. The accuracy was verified internally and externally. The diagnostic accuracy of IFP was 92.9%, sensitivity was 64.3%, and specificity was 96.9% in the validation group. Stratified analysis was then performed based on model risk. The diagnostic accuracy rates of IFP and NACiPM in low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk respectively were 96.0%, 93.3%, 83.9%, 61.3%, 66.7%, and 83.3%.

CONCLUSION

We created a visual nomogram to predict NACi risk in breast cancer patients. The NACiPM can be used to distinguish the low, intermediate, and high risk of NAC before surgery. Combined with IFP, we can develop a decision-making system for the implementation of NSM.

Health Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness of Children's Oncology Group Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines for Chest-Irradiated Hodgkin Lymphoma Survivors

PURPOSE

To evaluate the outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the Children's Oncology Group Guideline recommendation for breast cancer (BC) screening using mammography (MAM) and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in female chest-irradiated childhood Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), increasingly replacing MAM in practice, was also examined.

METHODS

Life years (LYs), quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs), BC mortality, health care costs, and false-positive screen frequencies of undergoing annual MAM, DBT, MRI, MAM + MRI, and DBT + MRI from age 25 to 74 years were estimated by microsimulation. BC risks and non-BC mortality were estimated from female 5-year survivors of HL in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and the US population. Test performance of MAM and MRI was synthesized from HL studies, and that of DBT from the general population. Costs (2017 US dollars [USD]) and utility weights were obtained from the medical literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.

RESULTS

With 100% screening adherence, annual BC screening extended LYs by 0.34-0.46 years over no screening. If the willingness-to-pay threshold to gain a quality-adjusted LY was ICER < $100,000 USD, annual MAM at age 25-74 years was the only cost-effective strategy. When nonadherence was taken into consideration, only annual MAM at age 30-74 years (ICER = $56,972 USD) was cost-effective. Supplementing annual MAM with MRI costing $545 USD was not cost-effective under either adherence condition. If MRI costs were reduced to $300 USD, adding MRI to annual MAM at age 30-74 years could become more cost-effective, particularly in the reduced adherence condition (ICER = $133,682 USD).

CONCLUSION

Annual BC screening using MAM at age 30-74 years is effective and cost-effective in female chest-irradiated HL survivors. Although annual adjunct MRI is not cost-effective at $545 USD cost, it could become cost-effective as MRI cost is reduced, a plausible scenario with the emergent use of abbreviated MRI.

Excellent results of screening for subsequent breast cancers in long-term survivors of childhood Hodgkin's lymphoma-Results of a population-based study

Introduction

Subsequent breast cancer (SBC) represents a major complication in childhood cancer survivors and screening for SBC in survivors after incidental irradiation of breasts is recommended. In this article, we report the results and discuss benefits of SBC screening in female pts treated for Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) in Slovenia in a period of 45 years.

Methods

Between 1966 and 2010, 117 females were treated for HL under the age of 19 in Slovenia. One hundred five of them survived for 5 years and were included in our study. They were 3-18 (med. 15) years old at diagnosis and followed for 6-52 (med. 28) years. Eighty-three percent of them had chest RT with a median dose of 30 Gy. Ninety-seven (92%) of 105 pts were regularly followed according to the international guidelines including yearly screening mammography/breast MRI in those who received chest RT.

Results

We diagnosed 10 SBCs in eight pts 14-39 (med. 24) years after diagnosis at the age of 28-52 (med. 42) years. At 40 years of follow-up, cumulative incidence of SBCs in females who got chest RT was 15.2%. Seven of eight patients (with 9 SBCs) got chest RT with 24-80 (med. 36) Gy at the age of 12 to 18 (median 17) years. Two patients in this group got bilateral SBC. One patient got invasive SBC after being treated with ChT containing high-dose of anthracyclines without chest RT at the age of 13. All eight invasive SBCs were invasive ductal cancers, HER2 receptors negative, all but one with positive hormonal receptors. Six invasive cancers were of stage T1N0, one T1N1mi, only one, diagnosed before era of screening, was of T2N1. None of 8 pts died of SBC.

Conclusion

After introduction of regular breast screening in our female patients, who received chest RT in childhood, all SBCs were of early stage and no patients died of SBC. Survivors of pediatric HL should be informed about the risk of late sequelae of treatment for HL, including SBC. Regular follow-up with breast cancer screening and breast self-examination is of vital importance in those treated with chest RT.

Association of Changes in Cancer Therapy Over 3 Decades With Risk of Subsequent Breast Cancer Among Female Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS)

Importance

Breast cancer is the most common invasive subsequent malignant disease in childhood cancer survivors, though limited data exist on changes in breast cancer rates as primary cancer treatments have evolved.

Objective

To quantify the association between temporal changes in cancer treatment over 3 decades and subsequent breast cancer risk.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Retrospective cohort study of 5-year cancer survivors diagnosed when younger than 21 years between 1970 and 1999, with follow-up through December 5, 2020.

Exposures

Radiation and chemotherapy dose changes over time.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Breast cancer cumulative incidence rates and age-specific standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) compared across treatment decades (1970-1999). Piecewise exponential models estimated invasive breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) risk and associations with treatment exposures, adjusted for age at childhood cancer diagnosis and attained age.

Results

Among 11 550 female survivors (median age, 34.2 years; range 5.6-66.8 years), 489 developed 583 breast cancers: 427 invasive, 156 DCIS. Cumulative incidence was 8.1% (95% CI, 7.3%-9.0%) by age 45 years. An increased breast cancer risk (SIR, 6.6; 95% CI, 6.1-7.2) was observed for survivors compared with the age-sex-calendar-year-matched general population. Changes in therapy by decade included reduced rates of chest (34% in the 1970s, 22% in the 1980s, and 17% in the 1990s) and pelvic radiotherapy (26%, 17%, and 13% respectively) and increased rates of anthracycline chemotherapy exposures (30%, 51%, and 64%, respectively). Adjusting for age and age at diagnosis, the invasive breast cancer rate decreased 18% every 5 years of primary cancer diagnosis era (rate ratio [RR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.74-0.90). When accounting for chest radiotherapy exposure, the decline attenuated to an 11% decrease every 5 years (RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81-0.99). When additionally adjusted for anthracycline dose and pelvic radiotherapy, the decline every 5 years increased to 14% (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96). Although SIRs of DCIS generally increased over time, there were no statistically significant changes in incidence.

Conclusions and Relevance

Invasive breast cancer rates in childhood cancer survivors have declined with time, especially in those younger than 40 years. This appears largely associated with the reduced use of chest radiation therapy, but was tempered by concurrent changes in other therapies.

Childhood Cancer Survivors' Adherence to Healthcare Recommendations Made Through a Distance-Delivered Survivorship Program

Purpose

Ongoing survivorship care allows childhood cancer survivors the opportunity to address treatment-related health problems and improve their quality of life. However, many survivors do not adhere to their healthcare professionals’ recommendations and the factors supporting their adherence remain unclear.

Patients and Methods

Long-term childhood cancer survivors completed the “Re-engage” program, which assessed survivors’ heath needs and provided individualised recommendations for health interventions and surveillance developed by an expert multi-disciplinary team (MDT). We measured survivors’ recall of, and adherence to, their individualised healthcare recommendations at one and six months post-intervention. We conducted a series of univariate negative binomial regressions to investigate factors associated with the total number of recommendations that were correctly recalled and adhered to.

Results

We analysed the data of 25 childhood cancer survivors who participated in Re-engage (mean age = 31.9 years). On average, survivors were provided with 6.6 recommendations (range = 1–11). Survivors accurately recalled receiving 3.0 recommendations at one month post-intervention and 1.9 at six months. Survivors had adhered to an average of 1.3 recommendations by six-month follow-up. In total, 56% of participants reported that they did not adhere to any recommendations. By six-month follow-up, greater adherence to MDT recommendations was associated with having a history of a second cancer (B = 1.391; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.686 to 2.097; p < 0.001) and reporting a greater level of worry about late effects (B = 1.381; 95% CI, 0.494 to 2.269; p = 0.002).

Conclusion

Survivors reported sub-optimal levels of adherence and demonstrated limited recall of their healthcare recommendations. Effective communication of recommendations and clear discussion of barriers limiting adherence, coupled with late effects education, may be critical to ensure that survivors engage with their recommendations, to improve their quality of life and health outcomes.

Trial Registration Number

ACTRN12618000194268.

Next Generation Risk Markers in Preventive Cardio-oncology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer are the first and second most common causes of death within the USA. It is well established that a diagnosis of cancer increases risk and predisposes the patient to CVD, and vice versa. Despite these associations, cancer is not yet incorporated into current CVD risk calculators, necessitating additional CV risk markers for improved stratification in this at-risk population. In this review, we consider the utility of breast arterial calcification (BAC), coronary artery calcification (CAC), clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), and cancer and cancer treatment in CVD risk assessment.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is evidence supporting the use of BAC, CAC, CHIP, and cancer and cancer treatment for improved CV risk stratification in patients with cancer and those who are being screened for cancer. BAC has been shown to predict CAC, coronary atherosclerotic plaque on coronary CTA, coronary artery stenosis on coronary angiography, and CVD events and accordingly enhances CVD risk stratification beyond the atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) risk pooled cohort equation. Additionally, CAC visualized on CT utilized for lung cancer screening, radiation planning, and cancer staging is predictive of coronary artery disease (CAD). Furthermore, CHIP can also be utilized in risk stratification, as the presence of CHIP carries a 40% increase in CV risk independent of traditional CV risk factors. Finally, cancer and many oncologic therapies confer a lifelong increased risk of CVD. We propose an emerging set of tools to be incorporated into the routine continuum of CVD risk assessment in individuals who have been treated for cancer or who are being screened for cancer development. In this review, we discuss BAC, CAC, CHIP, and cancer and cancer treatment as emerging risk markers in cardiovascular health assessment. Their effectiveness in predicting and influencing the burden of CVD will be discussed, along with suggestions on their incorporation into preventive cardio-oncology practice. Future research will focus on short- and long-term CVD outcomes in these populations.

Transcriptional inhibition of miR-486-3p by BCL6 upregulates Snail and induces epithelial-mesenchymal transition during radiation-induced pulmonary fibrosis

Background

Ionizing radiation (IR) can induce pulmonary fibrosis by causing epithelial mesenchymal transition (EMT), but the exact mechanism has not been elucidated. To investigate the molecular mechanism of how radiation induces pulmonary fibrosis by altering miR-486-3p content and thus inducing EMT.

Methods

The changes of miR-486-3p in cells after irradiation were detected by RT-qPCR. Western blot was used to detect the changes of cellular epithelial marker protein E-cadherin, mesenchymal marker N-cadherin, Vimentin and other proteins. The target gene of miR-486-3p was predicted by bioinformatics method and the binding site was verified by dual luciferase reporter system. In vivo experiments, adeno-associated virus (AAV) was used to carry miR-486-3p mimic to lung. Radiation-induced pulmonary fibrosis (RIPF) model was constructed by 25Gy⁶⁰Co γ-rays. The structural changes of mouse lung were observed by HE and Masson staining. The expression of relevant proteins in mice was detected by immunohistochemistry.

Results

IR could decrease the miR-486-3p levels in vitro and in vivo, and that effect was closely correlated to the occurrence of RIPF. The expression of Snail, which induces EMT, was shown to be restrained by miR-486-3p. Therefore, knockdown of Snail blocked the EMT process induced by radiation or knockdown of miR-486-3p. In addition, the molecular mechanism underlying the IR-induced miRNA level reduction was explored. The increased in BCL6 could inhibit the formation of pri-miR-486-3p, thereby reducing the levels of miR-486-3p in the alveolar epithelial cells, which would otherwise promote EMT and contribute to RIPF by targeting Snail.

Conclusion

IR can exacerbate RIPF in mice by activating the transcription factor BCL6, which inhibits the transcription of miR-486-3p and decreases its content, which in turn increases the content of the target gene slug and triggers EMT.

Breast Cancer Screening Strategies for Women With ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 Pathogenic Variants: A Comparative Modeling Analysis

IMPORTANCE

Screening mammography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are recommended for women with ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 pathogenic variants. However, there are few data to guide screening regimens for these women.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening strategies using mammography and MRI at various start ages for women with ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 pathogenic variants.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This comparative modeling analysis used 2 established breast cancer microsimulation models from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) to evaluate different screening strategies. Age-specific breast cancer risks were estimated using aggregated data from the Cancer Risk Estimates Related to Susceptibility (CARRIERS) Consortium for 32 247 cases and 32 544 controls in 12 population-based studies. Data on screening performance for mammography and MRI were estimated from published literature. The models simulated US women with ATM, CHEK2, or PALB2 pathogenic variants born in 1985.

INTERVENTIONS

Screening strategies with combinations of annual mammography alone and with MRI starting at age 25, 30, 35, or 40 years until age 74 years.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Estimated lifetime breast cancer mortality reduction, life-years gained, breast cancer deaths averted, total screening examinations, false-positive screenings, and benign biopsies per 1000 women screened. Results are reported as model mean values and ranges.

RESULTS

The mean model-estimated lifetime breast cancer risk was 20.9% (18.1%-23.7%) for women with ATM pathogenic variants, 27.6% (23.4%-31.7%) for women with CHEK2 pathogenic variants, and 39.5% (35.6%-43.3%) for women with PALB2 pathogenic variants. Across pathogenic variants, annual mammography alone from 40 to 74 years was estimated to reduce breast cancer mortality by 36.4% (34.6%-38.2%) to 38.5% (37.8%-39.2%) compared with no screening. Screening with annual MRI starting at 35 years followed by annual mammography and MRI at 40 years was estimated to reduce breast cancer mortality by 54.4% (54.2%-54.7%) to 57.6% (57.2%-58.0%), with 4661 (4635-4688) to 5001 (4979-5023) false-positive screenings and 1280 (1272-1287) to 1368 (1362-1374) benign biopsies per 1000 women. Annual MRI starting at 30 years followed by mammography and MRI at 40 years was estimated to reduce mortality by 55.4% (55.3%-55.4%) to 59.5% (58.5%-60.4%), with 5075 (5057-5093) to 5415 (5393-5437) false-positive screenings and 1439 (1429-1449) to 1528 (1517-1538) benign biopsies per 1000 women. When starting MRI at 30 years, initiating annual mammography starting at 30 vs 40 years did not meaningfully reduce mean mortality rates (0.1% [0.1%-0.2%] to 0.3% [0.2%-0.3%]) but was estimated to add 649 (602-695) to 650 (603-696) false-positive screenings and 58 (41-76) to 59 (41-76) benign biopsies per 1000 women.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This analysis suggests that annual MRI screening starting at 30 to 35 years followed by annual MRI and mammography at 40 years may reduce breast cancer mortality by more than 50% for women with ATM, CHEK2, and PALB2 pathogenic variants. In the setting of MRI screening, mammography prior to 40 years may offer little additional benefit.

Downstream Mammary and Extramammary Cascade Services and Spending Following Screening Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Mammography Among Commercially Insured Women

Importance

Increasing use of screening breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), including among women at low or average risk of breast cancer, raises concerns about resulting mammary and extramammary cascades (downstream services and new diagnoses) of uncertain value.

Objective

To estimate rates of cascade events (ie, laboratory tests, imaging tests, procedures, visits, hospitalizations, and new diagnoses) and associated spending following screening breast MRI vs mammography among commercially insured US women.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study used 2016 to 2018 data from the MarketScan research database (IBM Corporation), which includes claims and administrative data from large US employers and commercial payers. Participants included commercially insured women aged 40 to 64 years without prior breast cancer who received an index bilateral screening breast MRI or mammogram between January 1, 2017, and June 30, 2018. We used propensity scores based on sociodemographic, clinical, and utilization variables to match MRI recipients to mammogram recipients in each month of index service use. Data were analyzed from October 8, 2020, to October 28, 2021.

Exposures

Breast MRI vs mammography.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Mammary and extramammary cascade event rates and associated total and patient out-of-pocket spending in the 6 months following the index test.

Results

In this study, 9208 women receiving breast MRI were matched with 9208 women receiving mammography (mean [SD] age, 51.4 [6.7] years). Compared with mammogram recipients, breast MRI recipients had 39.0 additional mammary cascade events per 100 women (95% CI, 33.7-44.2), including 5.0 additional imaging tests (95% CI, 3.8-6.2), 17.3 additional procedures (95% CI, 15.5-19.0), 13.0 additional visits (95% CI, 9.4-17.2), 0.34 additional hospitalizations (95% CI, 0.18-0.50), and 3.0 additional new diagnoses (95% CI, 2.5-3.6). For extramammary cascades, breast MRI recipients had 19.6 additional events per 100 women (95% CI, 8.6-30.7) including 15.8 additional visits (95% CI, 10.2-21.4) and no statistically significant differences in other events. Breast MRI recipients had higher total spending for mammary events ($564 more per woman; 95% CI, $532-$596), extramammary events ($42 more per woman; 95% CI, $16-$69), and overall ($1404 more per woman; 95% CI, $1172-$1636). They also had higher overall out-of-pocket spending ($31 more per woman; 95% CI, $6-$55).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of commercially insured women, breast MRI was associated with more mammary and extramammary cascade events and spending relative to mammography. These findings can inform cost-benefit assessments and coverage policies to ensure breast MRI is reserved for patients for whom benefits outweigh harms.

Breast Cancer Screening Among Childhood Cancer Survivors Treated Without Chest Radiation: Clinical Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Early initiation of breast cancer screening is recommended for high-risk women, including survivors of childhood cancer treated with chest radiation. Recent studies suggest that female survivors of childhood leukemia or sarcoma treated without chest radiation are also at elevated early onset breast cancer risk. However, the potential clinical benefits and cost-effectiveness of early breast cancer screening among these women are uncertain.

METHODS

Using data from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, we adapted two Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) breast cancer simulation models to reflect the elevated risks of breast cancer and competing mortality among leukemia and sarcoma survivors. Costs and utility weights were based on published studies and databases. Outcomes included breast cancer deaths averted, false-positive-screening results, benign biopsies, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

RESULTS

In the absence of screening, the lifetime risk of dying from breast cancer among survivors was 6.8% to 7.0% across models. Early initiation of annual mammography with MRI screening between ages 25 and 40 would avert 52.6% to 64.3% of breast cancer deaths. When costs and quality of life impacts were considered, screening starting at age 40 was the only strategy with an ICER below the $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained cost-effectiveness threshold ($27,680 to $44,380 per QALY gained across models).

CONCLUSIONS

Among survivors of childhood leukemia or sarcoma, early initiation of breast cancer screening at age 40 may reduce breast cancer deaths by half and is cost-effective. These findings could help inform screening guidelines for survivors treated without chest radiation.

Cost-Sharing and Out-of-Pocket Cost for Women Who Received MRI for Breast Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

The financial protection of the Affordable Care Act's (ACA) prevention provision doesn't apply to breast MRI but only to mammography for breast cancer screening. The purpose of the study is to examine the financial burden among women who received breast MRI for screening.

METHODS

This observational study used the Marketscan® database. Women underwent breast MRI between 2009 and 2017 and had screening mammography within 6 months of the MRI were included. We compared the time trend of the proportion of zero cost-share for women undergoing screening mammography and that for MRI. We quantified out-of-pocket (OOP) costs as the sum of copayment, coinsurance, and deductible and defined zero cost-share as having no OOP cost. We conducted multivariable logistic regression and two-part model to examine factors associated with zero cost-share and OOP costs of MRI, respectively.

RESULTS

16,341 women had a screening breast MRI during the study period. The proportion of screening MRI claims with zero cost-share decreased from 43.1% (2009) to 26.2% (2017). The adjusted mean OOP cost for women in high-deductible plans was more than twice the cost for their counterparts ($549 vs. $251, 2-sided P < .001). Women who resided in the South in the post-ACA era were less likely to have zero cost-share and paid higher OOP costs for screening MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Many women are subject to high financial burden when receiving MRI for breast cancer screening. Those enrolled in high-deductible plans and who reside in the South are especially vulnerable financially.

Reflecting on 20 years of breast cancer modeling in CISNET: Recommendations for future cancer systems modeling efforts

Since 2000, the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) modeling teams have developed and applied microsimulation and statistical models of breast cancer. Here, we illustrate the use of collaborative breast cancer multilevel systems modeling in CISNET to demonstrate the flexibility of systems modeling to address important clinical and policy-relevant questions. Challenges and opportunities of future systems modeling are also summarized. The 6 CISNET breast cancer models embody the key features of systems modeling by incorporating numerous data sources and reflecting tumor, person, and health system factors that change over time and interact to affect the burden of breast cancer. Multidisciplinary modeling teams have explored alternative representations of breast cancer to reveal insights into breast cancer natural history, including the role of overdiagnosis and race differences in tumor characteristics. The models have been used to compare strategies for improving the balance of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening based on personal risk factors, including age, breast density, polygenic risk, and history of Down syndrome or a history of childhood cancer. The models have also provided evidence to support the delivery of care by simulating outcomes following clinical decisions about breast cancer treatment and estimating the relative impact of screening and treatment on the United States population. The insights provided by the CISNET breast cancer multilevel modeling efforts have informed policy and clinical guidelines. The 20 years of CISNET modeling experience has highlighted opportunities and challenges to expanding the impact of systems modeling. Moving forward, CISNET research will continue to use systems modeling to address cancer control issues, including modeling structural inequities affecting racial disparities in the burden of breast cancer. Future work will also leverage the lessons from team science, expand resource sharing, and foster the careers of early stage modeling scientists to ensure the sustainability of these efforts.

Since 2000, our research teams have used computer models of breast cancer to address important clinical and policy-relevant questions as part of the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET). Our 6 CISNET breast cancer models embody the key features of systems modeling by incorporating numerous data sources and reflecting tumor, person, and health system factors that change over time and interact to represent the burden of breast cancer. We have used our models to investigate questions related to breast cancer biology, compare strategies to improve the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography, and support insights into the delivery of care by modeling outcomes following clinical decisions about breast cancer treatment. Moving forward, our research will continue to use systems modeling to address issues related to reducing the burden of breast cancer including modeling structural inequities affecting racial disparities. Our future work will also leverage lessons from engaging multidisciplinary scientific teams, expand efforts to share modeling resources with other researchers, and foster the careers of early stage modeling scientists to ensure the sustainability of these efforts.