National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Diagnostic Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Purpose To establish contemporary performance benchmarks for diagnostic digital mammography with use of recent data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC). Materials and Methods Institutional review board approval was obtained for active or passive consenting processes or to obtain a waiver of consent to enroll participants, link data, and perform analyses. Data were obtained from six BCSC registries (418 radiologists, 92 radiology facilities). Mammogram indication and assessments were prospectively collected for women undergoing diagnostic digital mammography and linked with cancer diagnoses from state cancer registries. The study included 401 548 examinations conducted from 2007 to 2013 in 265 360 women. Results Overall diagnostic performance measures were as follows: cancer detection rate, 34.7 per 1000 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 34.1, 35.2); abnormal interpretation rate, 12.6% (95% CI: 12.5%, 12.7%); positive predictive value (PPV) of a biopsy recommendation (PPV2), 27.5% (95% CI: 27.1%, 27.9%); PPV of biopsies performed (PPV3), 30.4% (95% CI: 29.9%, 30.9%); false-negative rate, 4.8 per 1000 (95% CI: 4.6, 5.0); sensitivity, 87.8% (95% CI: 87.3%, 88.4%); and specificity, 90.5% (95% CI: 90.4%, 90.6%). Among cancers detected, 63.4% were stage 0 or 1 cancers, 45.6% were minimal cancers, the mean size of invasive cancers was 21.2 mm, and 69.6% of invasive cancers were node negative. Performance metrics varied widely across diagnostic indications, with cancer detection rate (64.5 per 1000) and abnormal interpretation rate (18.7%) highest for diagnostic mammograms obtained to evaluate a breast problem with a lump. Compared with performance during the screen-film mammography era, diagnostic digital performance showed increased abnormal interpretation and cancer detection rates and decreasing PPVs, with less than 70% of radiologists within acceptable ranges for PPV2 and PPV3. Conclusion These performance measures can serve as national benchmarks that may help transform the marked variation in radiologists' diagnostic performance into targeted quality improvement efforts. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

National Performance Benchmarks for Modern Screening Digital Mammography: Update from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Purpose To establish performance benchmarks for modern screening digital mammography and assess performance trends over time in U.S. community practice. Materials and Methods This HIPAA-compliant, institutional review board-approved study measured the performance of digital screening mammography interpreted by 359 radiologists across 95 facilities in six Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries. The study included 1 682 504 digital screening mammograms performed between 2007 and 2013 in 792 808 women. Performance measures were calculated according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, 5th edition, and were compared with published benchmarks by the BCSC, the National Mammography Database, and performance recommendations by expert opinion. Benchmarks were derived from the distribution of performance metrics across radiologists and were presented as 50th (median), 10th, 25th, 75th, and 90th percentiles, with graphic presentations using smoothed curves. Results Mean screening performance measures were as follows: abnormal interpretation rate (AIR), 11.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.5, 11.6); cancers detected per 1000 screens, or cancer detection rate (CDR), 5.1 (95% CI: 5.0, 5.2); sensitivity, 86.9% (95% CI: 86.3%, 87.6%); specificity, 88.9% (95% CI: 88.8%, 88.9%); false-negative rate per 1000 screens, 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7, 0.8); positive predictive value (PPV) 1, 4.4% (95% CI: 4.3%, 4.5%); PPV2, 25.6% (95% CI: 25.1%, 26.1%); PPV3, 28.6% (95% CI: 28.0%, 29.3%); cancers stage 0 or 1, 76.9%; minimal cancers, 57.7%; and node-negative invasive cancers, 79.4%. Recommended CDRs were achieved by 92.1% of radiologists in community practice, and 97.1% achieved recommended ranges for sensitivity. Only 59.0% of radiologists achieved recommended AIRs, and only 63.0% achieved recommended levels of specificity. Conclusion The majority of radiologists in the BCSC surpass cancer detection recommendations for screening mammography; however, AIRs continue to be higher than the recommended rate for almost half of radiologists interpreting screening mammograms. © RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Influenza vaccination of pregnant women: attitudes and behaviors of Oregon physician prenatal care providers.

In spite of increased risk of influenza complications during pregnancy, only half of US pregnant women get influenza vaccination. We surveyed physician prenatal care providers in Oregon to assess their knowledge and behaviors regarding vaccination of pregnant women. From September through November 2011, a state-wide survey was mailed to a simple random sample (n = 1,114) of Oregon obstetricians and family physicians. The response rate was 44.5 %. Of 496 survey respondents, 187 (37.7 %) had provided prenatal care within the last 12 months. Of these, 88.5 % reported that they routinely recommended influenza vaccine to healthy pregnant patients. No significant differences in vaccine recommendation were found by specialty, practice location, number of providers in their practice, physician gender or years in practice. In multivariable regression analysis, routinely recommending influenza vaccine was significantly associated with younger physician age [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.01, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.29-3.13] and greater number of pregnant patients seen per week (AOR 1.95, 95 % CI 1.25-3.06). Among rural physicians, fewer obstetricians (90.3 %) than family physicians (98.5 %) had vaccine-appropriate storage units (p = 0.001). Most physician prenatal care providers understand the importance of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. To increase influenza vaccine coverage among pregnant women, it will be necessary to identify and address patient barriers to receiving influenza vaccination during pregnancy.

Assessing the Impact of Different Depression Treatment Success Metrics on Organizational Performance.

Objective: The Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) is commonly used to assess depression symptoms, but its associated treatment success criteria (i.e., metrics) are inconsistently defined. The authors aimed to analyze the impact of metric choice on outcomes and discuss implications for clinical practice and research. Methods: Analyses included three overlapping and nonexclusive time cohorts of adult patients with depression treated in 33 organizations between 2008 and 2018. Average depression improvement rates were calculated according to eight metrics. Organization-level rank orders defined by these metrics were calculated and correlated. Results: The 12-month cohort had higher rates of metrics indicating treatment success than did the 3- and 6-month cohorts; the degree of improvement varied by metric, although all organization-level rank orders were highly correlated. Conclusions: Different PHQ-9 treatment metrics are associated with disparate improvement rates. Organization-level rankings defined by different metrics are highly correlated. Consistency of metric use may be more important than specific metric choice.

Rural clinics implementing collaborative care for low-income patients can achieve comparable or better depression outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The gap between depression treatment needs and the available mental health workforce is particularly large in rural areas. Collaborative care (CoCM) is an evidence-based approach that leverages limited mental health specialists for maximum population effect. This study evaluates depression treatment outcomes, clinical processes of care, and primary care provider experiences for CoCM implementation in 8 rural clinics treating low-income patients. METHOD: We used CoCM registry data to analyze depression response and remission then used logistic regression to model variance in depression outcomes. Primary care providers reported their experiences with this practice change 18 months following program launch. RESULTS: Participating clinics enrolled 5,187 adult patients, approximately 15% of the adult patient population. Mean PHQ-9 depression score was 16.1 at baseline and 10.9 at last individual measurement, a statistically and clinically significant improvement (SD6.7; 95% CI [4.9, 5.3]). Suicidal ideation also reduced significantly. Multivariate logistic regression predicted the probability of depression response and remission after controlling for several demographic attributes and processes of care, showing a significant amount of variance in outcomes could be explained by clinic, length of time in treatment, and age. Primary care providers reported positive experiences overall. DISCUSSION: Three quarters of participating primary care clinics, adapting CoCM for limited resource settings, exceeded depression response outcomes reported in a controlled research trial and mirrored results of large-scale quality improvement implementations. Future research should examine quality improvement strategies to address clinic-level variation and sustain improvements in clinical outcomes achieved. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Performance of Screening Ultrasonography as an Adjunct to Screening Mammography in Women Across the Spectrum of Breast Cancer Risk.

Importance: Whole-breast ultrasonography has been advocated to supplement screening mammography to improve outcomes in women with dense breasts. Objective: To determine the performance of screening mammography plus screening ultrasonography compared with screening mammography alone in community practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: Observational cohort study. Two Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium registries provided prospectively collected data on screening mammography with vs without same-day breast ultrasonography from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2013. The dates of analysis were March 2014 to December 2018. A total of 6081 screening mammography plus same-day screening ultrasonography examinations in 3386 women were propensity score matched 1:5 to 30 062 screening mammograms without screening ultrasonography in 15 176 women from a sample of 113 293 mammograms. Exclusion criteria included a personal history of breast cancer and self-reported breast symptoms. Exposures: Screening mammography with vs without screening ultrasonography. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cancer detection rate and rates of interval cancer, false-positive biopsy recommendation, short-interval follow-up, and positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation were estimated and compared using log binomial regression. Results: Screening mammography with vs without ultrasonography examinations was performed more often in women with dense breasts (74.3% [n = 4317 of 5810] vs 35.9% [n = 39 928 of 111 306] in the overall sample), in women who were younger than 50 years (49.7% [n = 3022 of 6081] vs 31.7% [n = 16 897 of 112 462]), and in women with a family history of breast cancer (42.9% [n = 2595 of 6055] vs 15.0% [n = 16 897 of 112 462]). While 21.4% (n = 1154 of 5392) of screening ultrasonography examinations were performed in women with high or very high (≥2.50%) Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium 5-year risk scores, 53.6% (n = 2889 of 5392) had low or average (<1.67%) risk. Comparing mammography plus ultrasonography with mammography alone, the cancer detection rate was similar at 5.4 vs 5.5 per 1000 screens (adjusted relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% CI, 0.76-1.68), as were interval cancer rates at 1.5 vs 1.9 per 1000 screens (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.33-1.37). The false-positive biopsy rates were significantly higher at 52.0 vs 22.2 per 1000 screens (RR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.93-2.58), as was short-interval follow-up at 3.9% vs 1.1% (RR, 3.10; 95% CI, 2.60-3.70). The positive predictive value of biopsy recommendation was significantly lower at 9.5% vs 21.4% (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.35-0.71). Conclusions and Relevance: In a relatively young population of women at low, intermediate, and high breast cancer risk, these results suggest that the benefits of supplemental ultrasonography screening may not outweigh associated harms.

Change in Breast Cancer Screening Intervals Since the 2009 USPSTF Guideline.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended biennial mammography for women aged 50-74 years and shared decision-making for women aged 40-49 years for breast cancer screening. We evaluated changes in mammography screening interval after the 2009 recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of women aged 40-74 years who received 821,052 screening mammograms between 2006 and 2012 using data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. We compared changes in screening intervals and stratified intervals based on whether the mammogram at the end of the interval occurred before or after the 2009 recommendation. Differences in mean interval length by woman-level characteristics were compared using linear regression. RESULTS: The mean interval (in months) minimally decreased after the 2009 USPSTF recommendations. Among women aged 40-49 years, the mean interval decreased from 17.2 months to 17.1 months (difference -0.16%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.30 to -0.01). Similar small reductions were seen for most age groups. The largest change in interval length in the post-USPSTF period was declines among women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer (difference -0.68%, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.54) or a 5-year breast cancer risk ≥2.5% (difference -0.58%, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.44). CONCLUSIONS: The 2009 USPSTF recommendation did not lengthen the average mammography interval among women routinely participating in mammography screening. Future studies should evaluate whether breast cancer screening intervals lengthen toward biennial intervals following new national 2016 breast cancer screening recommendations, particularly among women less than 50 years of age.

Emerging Trends in Family History of Breast Cancer and Associated Risk.

Background: Increase in breast cancer incidence associated with mammography screening diffusion may have attenuated risk associations between family history and breast cancer.Methods: The proportions of women ages 40 to 74 years reporting a first-degree family history of breast cancer were estimated in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium cohort (BCSC: N = 1,170,900; 1996-2012) and the Collaborative Breast Cancer Study (CBCS: cases N = 23,400; controls N = 26,460; 1987-2007). Breast cancer (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive) relative risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with family history were calculated using multivariable Cox proportional hazard and logistic regression models.Results: The proportion of women reporting a first-degree family history increased from 11% in the 1980s to 16% in 2010 to 2013. Family history was associated with a >60% increased risk of breast cancer in the BCSC (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.55-1.66) and CBCS (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.57-1.72). Relative risks decreased slightly with age. Consistent trends in relative risks were not observed over time or across stage of disease at diagnosis in both studies, except among older women (ages 60-74) where estimates were attenuated from about 1.7 to 1.3 over the last 20 years (P trend = 0.08 for both studies).Conclusions: Although the proportion of women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer increased over time and by age, breast cancer risk associations with family history were nonetheless fairly constant over time for women under age 60.Impact: First-degree family history of breast cancer remains an important breast cancer risk factor, especially for younger women, despite its increasing prevalence in the mammography screening era. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(12); 1753-60. ©2017 AACR.

Establishment of a statewide network for carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae prevention in a low-incidence region.

OBJECTIVE: To establish a statewide network to detect, control, and prevent the spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) in a region with a low incidence of CRE infection. DESIGN: Implementation of the Drug Resistant Organism Prevention and Coordinated Regional Epidemiology (DROP-CRE) Network. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Oregon infection prevention and microbiology laboratory personnel, including 48 microbiology laboratories, 62 acute care facilities, and 140 long-term care facilities. METHODS: The DROP-CRE working group, comprising representatives from academic institutions and public health, convened an interdisciplinary advisory committee to assist with planning and implementation of CRE epidemiology and control efforts. The working group established a statewide CRE definition and surveillance plan; increased the state laboratory capacity to perform the modified Hodge test and polymerase chain reaction for carbapenemases in real time; and administered surveys that assessed the needs and capabilities of Oregon infection prevention and laboratory personnel. Results of these inquiries informed CRE education and the response plan. RESULTS: Of 60 CRE reported from November 2010 through April 2013, only 3 were identified as carbapenemase producers; the cases were not linked, and no secondary transmission was found. Microbiology laboratories, acute care facilities, and long-term care facilities reported lacking carbapenemase testing capability, reliable interfacility communication, and CRE awareness, respectively. Survey findings informed the creation of the Oregon CRE Toolkit, a state-specific CRE guide booklet. CONCLUSIONS: A regional epidemiology surveillance and response network has been implemented in Oregon in advance of widespread CRE transmission. Prospective surveillance will determine whether this collaborative approach will be successful at forestalling the emergence of this important healthcare-associated pathogen.

Circumferential or sectored beam arrangements for stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) of primary lung tumors: effect on target and normal-structure dose-volume metrics.

To compare 2 beam arrangements, sectored (beam entry over ipsilateral hemithorax) vs circumferential (beam entry over both ipsilateral and contralateral lungs), for static-gantry intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery techniques with respect to target and organs-at-risk (OAR) dose-volume metrics, as well as treatment delivery efficiency. Data from 60 consecutive patients treated using stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for primary non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) formed the basis of this study. Four treatment plans were generated per data set: IMRT/VMAT plans using sectored (-s) and circumferential (-c) configurations. The prescribed dose (PD) was 60Gy in 5 fractions to 95% of the planning target volume (PTV) (maximum PTV dose ~ 150% PD) for a 6-MV photon beam. Plan conformality, R50 (ratio of volume circumscribed by the 50% isodose line and the PTV), and D2cm (Dmax at a distance ≥2cm beyond the PTV) were evaluated. For lungs, mean doses (mean lung dose [MLD]) and percent V30/V20/V10/V5Gy were assessed. Spinal cord and esophagus Dmax and D5/D50 were computed. Chest wall (CW) Dmax and absolute V30/V20/V10/V5Gy were reported. Sectored SBRT planning resulted in significant decrease in contralateral MLD and V10/V5Gy, as well as contralateral CW Dmax and V10/V5Gy (all p < 0.001). Nominal reductions of Dmax and D5/D50 for the spinal cord with sectored planning did not reach statistical significance for static-gantry IMRT, although VMAT metrics did show a statistically significant decrease (all p < 0.001). The respective measures for esophageal doses were significantly lower with sectored planning (p < 0.001). Despite comparable dose conformality, irrespective of planning configuration, R50 significantly improved with IMRT-s/VMAT-c (p < 0.001/p = 0.008), whereas D2cm significantly improved with VMAT-c (p < 0.001). Plan delivery efficiency improved with sectored technique (p < 0.001); mean monitor unit (MU)/cGy of PD decreased from 5.8 ± 1.9 vs 5.3 ± 1.7 (IMRT) and 2.7 ± 0.4 vs 2.4 ± 0.3 (VMAT). The sectored configuration achieves unambiguous dosimetric advantages over circumferential arrangement in terms of esophageal, contralateral CW, and contralateral lung sparing, in addition to being more efficient at delivery.