The association of prescription opioid use with incident cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare population-based case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer is the second leading cause of death globally, and researchers seek to identify modifiable risk factors Over the past several decades, there has been ongoing debate whether opioids are associated with cancer development, metastasis, or recurrence. Basic science, clinical, and observational studies have produced conflicting results. The authors examined the association between prescription opioids and incident cancers using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare database. A complex relation was observed between prescription opioids and incident cancer, and cancer site may be an important determinant. METHODS: By using linked SEER cancer registry and Medicare claims from 2008 through 2013, a case-control study was conducted examining the relation between cancer onset and prior opioid exposure. Logistic regression was used to account for differences between cases and controls for 10 cancer sites. RESULTS: Of the population studied (n = 348,319), 34% were prescribed opioids, 79.5% were white, 36.9% were dually eligible (for both Medicare and Medicaid), 13% lived in a rural area, 52.7% had ≥1 comorbidity, and 16% had a smoking-related diagnosis. Patients exposed to opioids had a lower odds ratio (OR) associated with breast cancer (adjusted OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99) and colon cancer (adjusted OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.93) compared with controls. Higher ORs for kidney cancer, leukemia, liver cancer, lung cancer, and lymphoma, ranging from lung cancer (OR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.07) to liver cancer (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.31), were present in the exposed population. CONCLUSIONS: The current results suggest that an association exists between prescription opioids and incident cancer and that cancer site may play an important role. These findings can direct future research on specific patient populations that may benefit or be harmed by prescription opioid exposure.

The Role of Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment and Surgical Treatment of Interval and Screen-Detected Breast Cancer in Older Women.

We describe the relationship between preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the utilization of additional imaging, biopsy, and primary surgical treatment for subgroups of women with interval versus screen-detected breast cancer. We determined the proportion of women receiving additional breast imaging or biopsy and type of primary surgical treatment, stratified by use of preoperative MRI, separately for both groups. Using Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) data, we identified a cohort of women age 66 and older with an interval or screen-detected breast cancer diagnosis between 2005 and 2010. Using logistic regression, we explored associations between primary surgical treatment type and preoperative MRI use for interval and screen-detected cancers. There were 204 women with an interval cancer and 1,254 with a screen-detected cancer. The interval cancer group was more likely to receive preoperative MRI (21% versus 13%). In both groups, women receiving MRI were more likely to receive additional imaging and/or biopsy. Receipt of MRI was not associated with increased odds of mastectomy (OR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.67-1.50), while interval cancer diagnosis was associated with significantly higher odds of mastectomy (OR = 1.64, 95% CI: 1.11-2.42). Older women with interval cancer were more likely than women with a screen-detected cancer to have preoperative MRI, however, those with an interval cancer had 64% higher odds of mastectomy regardless of receipt of MRI. Given women with interval cancer are reported to have a worse prognosis, more research is needed to understand effectiveness of imaging modalities and treatment consequences within this group.

Breast MRI in the Diagnostic and Preoperative Workup Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: We compared the frequency and sequence of breast imaging and biopsy use for the diagnostic and preoperative workup of breast cancer according to breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) use among older women. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using SEER-Medicare data from 2004 to 2010, we identified women with and without breast MRI as part of their diagnostic and preoperative breast cancer workup and measured the number and sequence of breast imaging and biopsy events per woman. RESULTS: A total of 10,766 (20%) women had an MRI in the diagnostic/preoperative period, 32,178 (60%) had mammogram and ultrasound, and 10,669 (20%) had mammography alone. MRI use increased across study years, tripling from 2005 to 2009 (9%-29%). Women with MRI had higher rates of breast imaging and biopsy compared with those with mammogram and ultrasound or those with mammography alone (5.8 vs. 4.1 vs. 2.8, respectively). There were 4254 unique sequences of breast events; the dominant patterns for women with MRI were an MRI occurring at the end of the care pathway. Among women receiving an MRI postdiagnosis, 26% had a subsequent biopsy compared with 51% receiving a subsequent biopsy in the subgroup without MRI. CONCLUSIONS: Older women who receive breast MRI undergo additional breast imaging and biopsy events. There is much variability in the diagnostic/preoperative work-up in older women, demonstrating the opportunity to increase standardization to optimize care for all women.

Costs of diagnostic and preoperative workup with and without breast MRI in older women with a breast cancer diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer in the U.S. - estimated at 232,670 incident cases in 2014 - has the highest aggregate economic burden of care relative to other female cancers. Yet, the amount of cost attributed to diagnostic/preoperative work up has not been characterized. We examined the costs of imaging and biopsy among women enrolled in Medicare who did and did not receive diagnostic/preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). METHODS: Using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)- Medicare data, we compared the per capita costs (PCC) based on amount paid, between diagnosis date and primary surgical treatment for a breast cancer diagnosis (2005-2009) with and without diagnostic/preoperative MRI. We compared the groups with and without MRI using multivariable models, adjusting for woman and tumor characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 53,653 women in the cohort, within the diagnostic/preoperative window, 20 % (N = 10,776) received diagnostic/preoperative MRI. Total unadjusted median costs were almost double for women with MRI vs. without ($2,251 vs. $1,152). Adjusted costs were higher among women receiving MRI, with significant differences in total costs ($1,065), imaging costs ($928), and biopsies costs ($138). CONCLUSION: Costs of diagnostic/preoperative workups among women with MRI are higher than those without. Using these cost estimates in comparative effectiveness models should be considered when assessing the benefits and harms of diagnostic/preoperative MRI.

Beyond polarization, public preferences suggest policy opportunities to address aging, dying, and family caregiving.

Despite well-documented deficiencies and widespread suffering experienced by millions of elderly or ill Americans and their families, politicians rarely address end-of-life issues. Citizen Forums in New Hampshire surveyed 463 people regarding aging, serious illness, and caregiving. More than 80% indicated it was very or extremely important to have their dignity respected, preferences honored, pain controlled, and to not leave family with debt. Less than half strongly endorsed being kept alive as long as possible, prayed with or for, or having assisted-suicide available. Over 80% strongly endorsed palliative care requirements clinical licensure and reimbursement, expansion of family caregiver leave, respite care, and bereavement support. By avoiding actions which elicit strong divergence of opinion and focusing on actions on which consensus exists, public officials and candidates can respond to problems and improve care and experience for frail elders, dying Americans, and their families.

Discovery of breast cancers within 1 year of a normal screening mammogram: how are they found?

PURPOSE: We sought to determine how breast cancers that occur within 1 year after a normal mammogram are discovered. METHODS: Using population-based mammography registry data from 2000-2002, we identified 143 women with interval breast cancers and 481 women with screen-detected breast cancers. We surveyed women's primary care clinicians to assess how the interval breast cancers were found and factors associated with their discovery. RESULTS: Women with interval cancers were twice as likely to have a personal history of breast cancer (30.1%) as women with screen-detected cancers (13.6%). Among women with interval cancers, one half of the invasive tumors (49.5%) were discovered when women initiated a health care visit because of a breast concern, and 16.8% were discovered when a clinician found an area of concern while conducting a routine clinical breast examination. Having a lump and both a personal and a family history of breast cancer was the most common reason why women initiated a health care visit (44%) (P <.01). CONCLUSIONS: Women with interval cancers are most likely to initiate a visit to a primary care clinician when they have 2 or more breast concerns. These concerns are most likely to include having a lump and a personal and/or family history of breast cancer. Women at highest risk for breast cancer may need closer surveillance by their primary care clinicians and may benefit from a strong educational message to come for a visit as soon as they find a lump.

Utilization of screening mammography in New Hampshire: a population-based assessment.

BACKGROUND: The objective of screening mammography is to identify breast carcinoma early, which requires routine screening. Although self-report data indicate that screening utilization is high, the results of this population-based assessment indicated that utilization is lower than reported previously. METHODS: The authors compared New Hampshire population data from the 2000 Census with clinical encounter data for the corresponding time obtained from the New Hampshire Mammography Network, a mammography registry that captures approximately 90% of the mammograms performed in participating New Hampshire facilities. RESULTS: The results showed that approximately 36% of New Hampshire women either never had a mammogram or had not had a mammogram in > 27 months (irregular screenees), and older women (80 yrs and older) were less likely to be screened (79% unscreened/underscreened) compared with younger women (ages 40-69 yrs; 28-32% unscreened/underscreened). Of the screened women, 44% were adhering to an interval of 14 months, and 21% were adhering within 15 months and 26 months. The remaining 35% of the women had 1 or 2 mammograms and did not return within 27 months. CONCLUSIONS: Routine mammography screening may be occurring less often than believed when survey data alone are used. An important, compelling concern is the reason women had one or two mammograms only and then did not return for additional screening. This area deserves additional research.

Screening mammography: costs and use of screening-related services.

PURPOSE: To determine the costs and screening-related services in women undergoing screening mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study procedures were approved by the institutional committee for the protection of human subjects, and participants gave prior written consent. Data from a statewide mammography registry were used to identify imaging examinations, clinical consultations, interventional procedures, and pathology reports associated with screening mammography. The analysis included 99 064 women in the New Hampshire Mammography Network who underwent screening mammography between November 1, 1996, and March 31, 2000. Use of screening-related services in each case was tracked over an 18-month period, and procedure-specific national Medicare reimbursement rates from 2002 were applied for estimation of costs. Descriptive statistics (means, medians, standard deviations, 95% confidence intervals, frequencies, and percentages of resources and of costs) were calculated. RESULTS: The majority of subjects (85 809, or 87%) underwent screening mammography only. Of the 13 255 (13%) who underwent diagnostic imaging, additional mammographic views were obtained in most at the time of screening, within days or weeks of screening, or at short-interval follow-up. The total cost was $12 287 739. Approximately 80% ($9 777 670) of the total cost was related to imaging, and 68% ($8 410 313), specifically to screening mammography. Twenty percent ($2 510 069) of the total cost was associated with consultation and interventional procedures in only 2942 (3%) of the women, primarily those who underwent biopsy. Procedures resulted in benign findings in 2247 (76%) of the 2942. Mean total direct medical costs per capita were low ($99) in women who underwent screening mammography only, moderate ($286) in women who also underwent diagnostic imaging, and substantially greater in women who underwent biopsy ($993). CONCLUSION: While the largest component cost of screening mammography is that incurred in obtaining screening views alone, the highest costs per capita are associated with interventional procedures.