Predictors of nonadherence to breast cancer screening guidelines in a United States urban comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to identify predictors of nonadherence to breast cancer screening guidelines in an urban screening clinic among high- and average-risk women in the United States. METHODS: We reviewed records of 6090 women who received ≥2 screening mammograms over 2 years at the Karmanos Cancer Institute to examine how breast cancer risk and breast density were associated with guideline-concordant screening. Incongruent screening was defined as receiving supplemental imaging between screening mammograms for average-risk women, and as not receiving recommended supplemental imaging for high-risk women. We used t-tests and chi-square tests to examine bivariate associations with guideline-congruent screening, and probit regression to regress guideline-congruence unto breast cancer risk, breast density, and their interaction, controlling for age and race. RESULTS: Incongruent screening was more likely among high- versus average-risk women (97.7% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.01). Among average-risk women, incongruent screening was more likely among those with dense versus nondense breasts (2.0% vs. 0.1%, p < 0.01). Among high-risk women, incongruent screening was more likely among those with nondense versus dense breasts (99.5% vs. 95.2%, p < 0.01). The significant main effects of density and high-risk on increased incongruent screening were qualified by a density by high-risk interaction, showing a weaker association between risk and incongruent screening among women with dense breasts (simple slope = 3.71, p < 0.01) versus nondense breasts (simple slope = 5.79, p < 0.01). Age and race were not associated with incongruent screening. CONCLUSIONS: Lack of adherence to evidence-based screening guidelines has led to underutilization of supplementary imaging for high-risk women and potential overutilization for women with dense breasts without other risk factors.

Patient-centered care and genomic medicine: A qualitative provider study in the military health system.

The diagnostic and predictive information produced by genomic sequencing may impact medical management, and it is critical that providers and institutions are able to use this information appropriately for patient care. Guided by the patient-centered care model, we investigated provider perspectives of patient, provider, and system-level factors that could influence the implementation of genomic medicine within the integrated healthcare system of the US Department of Defense (DOD). The purpose of this study was to explore patient-centered care elements related to the application of genomic sequencing in a military healthcare facility to understand the current capability and key gaps for patient-centered genomic medicine. Twenty DOD healthcare providers were interviewed regarding their past experiences and future expectations of genetics and genomics. These semi-structured interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed. All providers interviewed had some experience with genetics, but the level of experience varied greatly. Providers reported widely differing degrees of knowledge and confidence regarding genetics and about military-specific policies regarding genetics which varied by specialty. In addition, most providers stated that their department did not currently have the infrastructure to allow for the care of patients with secondary genetic findings, defined as genetic findings which are intentionally examined because of their importance to healthcare management, but are unrelated to the reason the individual underwent sequencing. This study reveals gaps in key elements of patient-centered care related to genomic medicine that may be helpful to address in future implementation efforts.

Underuse of exon mutational analysis for gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

BACKGROUND: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) have become the guideline-recommended therapy for high-risk resected and advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs). Exon mutational analysis (EMA) is used to inform pretherapy response to TKI and may predict overall prognosis. Despite these benefits, EMA remains underused, and its impact on TKI therapy decision-making remains unexplored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort was established from 104 patients receiving treatment for GISTs from 2006 to 2017. Current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines indicate that EMA should be considered for all patients undergoing TKI therapy to identify genotypes that are likely, or unlikely, to respond to treatment. We first tracked guideline-considered EMA use and subsequent impact on treatment decision-making. A questionnaire was then administered to gastrointestinal medical oncologists to assess EMA perception. RESULTS: Among 104 GIST patients, 54 (52%) received TKI therapy. Of these, only 22 (41%) received EMA. Informed by EMA, treatment decisions included 59% who continued with original TKI therapy, 32% who switched to an alternative TKI, and 9% who discontinued or received no TKI. Although 92% of physicians indicated EMA was a valuable tool, only 62% indicated they used it "frequently" or "always" to inform treatment decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of patients receiving TKI therapy for GISTs received EMA at a comprehensive cancer center. Despite this low uptake, when it was performed, EMA guided alternative treatment decision in 41% of patients. Physician survey responses indicated that interventions targeting physician education and an electronic medical record reminder may improve EMA uptake.

Cost Effectiveness of Gene Expression Profile Testing in Community Practice.

Purpose Gene expression profile (GEP) testing can support chemotherapy decision making for patients with early-stage, estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative breast cancers. This study evaluated the cost effectiveness of one GEP test, Onco type DX (Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA), in community practice with test-eligible patients age 40 to 79 years. Methods A simulation model compared 25-year societal incremental costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of community Onco type DX use from 2005 to 2012 versus usual care in the pretesting era (2000 to 2004). Inputs included Onco type DX and chemotherapy data from an integrated health care system and national and published data on Onco type DX accuracy, chemotherapy effectiveness, utilities, survival and recurrence, and Medicare and patient costs. Sensitivity analyses varied individual parameters; results were also estimated for ideal conditions (ie, 100% testing and adherence to test-suggested treatment, perfect test accuracy, considering test effects on reassurance or worry, and lowest costs). Results Twenty-four percent of test-eligible patients had Onco type DX testing. Testing was higher in younger patients and patients with stage I disease ( v stage IIA), and 75.3% and 10.2% of patients with high and low recurrence risk scores received chemotherapy, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratio for testing ( v usual care) was $188,125 per QALY. Considering test effects on worry versus reassurance decreased the cost-effectiveness ratio to $58,431 per QALY. With perfect test accuracy, the cost-effectiveness ratio was $28,947 per QALY, and under ideal conditions, it was $39,496 per QALY. Conclusion GEP testing is likely to have a high cost-effectiveness ratio on the basis of community practice patterns. However, realistic variations in assumptions about key variables could result in GEP testing having cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of other accepted interventions. The differences in cost-effectiveness ratios on the basis of community versus ideal conditions underscore the importance of considering real-world implementation when assessing the new technology.

A web-based personalized risk communication and decision-making tool for women with dense breasts: Design and methods of a randomized controlled trial within an integrated health care system.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic breast density is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer after age and family history. Mandatory breast density disclosure policies are increasing nationally without clear guidance on how to communicate density status to women. Coupling density disclosure with personalized risk counseling and decision support through a web-based tool may be an effective way to allow women to make informed, values-consistent risk management decisions without increasing distress. METHODS/DESIGN: This paper describes the design and methods of Engaged, a prospective, randomized controlled trial examining the effect of online personalized risk counseling and decision support on risk management decisions in women with dense breasts and increased breast cancer risk. The trial is embedded in a large integrated health care system in the Pacific Northwest. A total of 1250 female health plan members aged 40-69 with a recent negative screening mammogram who are at increased risk for interval cancer based on their 5-year breast cancer risk and BI-RADS® breast density will be randomly assigned to access either a personalized web-based counseling and decision support tool or standard educational content. Primary outcomes will be assessed using electronic health record data (i.e., chemoprevention and breast MRI utilization) and telephone surveys (i.e., distress) at baseline, six weeks, and twelve months. DISCUSSION: Engaged will provide evidence about whether a web-based personalized risk counseling and decision support tool is an effective method for communicating with women about breast density and risk management. An effective intervention could be disseminated with minimal clinical burden to align with density disclosure mandates. Clinical Trials Registration Number:NCT03029286.