Outcomes of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in relation to familial history: a decision analysis (BRCR-D-16-00033).

BACKGROUND: Family history of breast cancer is associated with an increased risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) even in the absence of mutations in the breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1/2. We compared quality-adjusted survival after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) with surveillance only (no CPM) among women with breast cancer incorporating the degree of family history. METHODS: We created a microsimulation model for women with first-degree, second-degree, and no family history treated for a stage I, II, or III estrogen receptor (ER)-positive or ER-negative breast cancer at the ages of 40, 50, 60, and 70. The model incorporated a 10-year posttreatment period for risk of developing CBC and/or dying of the primary cancer or CBC. For each patient profile, we used 100,000 microsimulation trials to estimate quality-adjusted life expectancy for the clinical strategies CPM and no CPM. RESULTS: CPM showed minimal improvement on quality-adjusted life expectancy among women age 50-60 with no or a unilateral first-degree or second-degree family history (decreasing from 0.31 to -0.06 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)) and was unfavorable for most subgroups of women age 70 with stage III breast cancer regardless of degree of family history (range -0.08 to -0.02 QALYs). Sensitivity analysis showed that the highest predicted benefit of CPM assuming 95 % risk reduction in CBC was 0.57 QALYs for a 40-year-old woman with stage I breast cancer who had a first-degree relative with bilateral breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Women age 40 with stage I breast cancer and a first-degree relative with bilateral breast cancer have a QALY benefit from CPM similar to that reported for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. For most subgroups of women, CPM has a minimal to no effect on quality-adjusted life expectancy, irrespective of family history of breast cancer.

Telemedicine and telesurgery in cancer care: inaugural conference at MD Anderson Cancer Center.

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing incidence of cancer worldwide, there are an insufficient number of primary care physicians, community oncologists, and surgeons to meet the demand for cancer care, especially in rural and other medically underserved areas. Teleoncology, including diagnostics, treatment, and supportive care, has the potential to enhance access to cancer care and to improve clinician education and training. OBJECTIVES: Major cancer centers such as The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center must determine how teleoncology will be used as part of strategic planning for the future. The Telemedicine and Telesurgery in Cancer Care (TTCC) conference was convened to determine technologically based strategies for addressing global access to essential cancer care services. RESULTS: The TTCC conference brought policy makers together with physicians, legal and regulatory experts to define strategies to optimize available resources, including teleoncology, to advance global cancer care. CONCLUSIONS: The TTCC conference discourse provided insight into the present state of access to care, expertise, training, technology and other interventions, including teleoncology, currently available through MD Anderson, as well as a vision of what might be achievable in the future, and proposals for moving forward with a comprehensive strategy.

Cost of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy.

PURPOSE: To compare the healthcare costs of women with unilateral breast cancer who underwent contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) with those of women who did not. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 904 women treated for stage I-III breast cancer with or without CPM. Women were matched according to age, year at diagnosis, stage, and receipt of chemotherapy. We included healthcare costs starting from the date of surgery to 24 months. We identified whether care was immediate or delayed (CPM within 6 months or 6-24 months after initial surgery, respectively). Costs were converted to approximate Medicare reimbursement values and adjusted for inflation. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of CPM on total breast cancer care costs adjusting for patient characteristics and accounting for matched pairs. RESULTS: The mean difference between the CPM and no-CPM matched groups was $3,573 (standard error [SE] $455) for professional costs, $4,176 (SE $1,724) for technical costs, and $7,749 (SE $2,069) for total costs. For immediate and delayed CPM, the mean difference for total costs was $6,528 (SE $2,243) and $16,744 (SE $5,017), respectively. In multivariable analysis, the CPM group had a statistically significant increase of 16.9 % in mean total costs compared with the no-CPM group (p < 0.0001). Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2/neu-positive status, receipt of radiation, and reconstruction were associated with increases in total costs. CONCLUSIONS: CPM significantly increases short-term healthcare costs for women with unilateral breast cancer. These patient-level cost results can be used for future studies that evaluate the influence of costs of CPM on decision making.