Comparing accuracy of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography or synthetic 2D mammography in breast cancer screening: baseline results of the MAITA RCT consortium.

AIM: The analyses here reported aim to compare the screening performance of digital tomosynthesis (DBT) versus mammography (DM). METHODS: MAITA is a consortium of four Italian trials, REtomo, Proteus, Impeto, and MAITA trial. The trials adopted a two-arm randomised design comparing DBT plus DM (REtomo and Proteus) or synthetic-2D (Impeto and MAITA trial) versus DM; multiple vendors were included. Women aged 45 to 69 years were individually randomised to one round of DBT or DM. FINDINGS: From March 2014 to February 2022, 50,856 and 63,295 women were randomised to the DBT and DM arm, respectively. In the DBT arm, 6656 women were screened with DBT plus synthetic-2D. Recall was higher in the DBT arm (5·84% versus 4·96%), with differences between centres. With DBT, 0·8/1000 (95% CI 0·3 to 1·3) more women received surgical treatment for a benign lesion. The detection rate was 51% higher with DBT, ie. 2·6/1000 (95% CI 1·7 to 3·6) more cancers detected, with a similar relative increase for invasive cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ. The results were similar below and over the age of 50, at first and subsequent rounds, and with DBT plus DM and DBT plus synthetic-2D. No learning curve was appreciable. Detection of cancers >= 20 mm, with 2 or more positive lymph nodes, grade III, HER2-positive, or triple-negative was similar in the two arms. INTERPRETATION: Results from MAITA confirm that DBT is superior to DM for the detection of cancers, with a possible increase in recall rate. DBT performance in screening should be assessed locally while waiting for long-term follow-up results on the impact of advanced cancer incidence.

Plasma microRNA ratios associated with breast cancer detection in a nested case-control study from a mammography screening cohort.

Mammographic breast cancer screening is effective in reducing breast cancer mortality. Nevertheless, several limitations are known. Therefore, developing an alternative or complementary non-invasive tool capable of increasing the accuracy of the screening process is highly desirable. The objective of this study was to identify circulating microRNA (miRs) ratios associated with BC in women attending mammography screening. A nested case-control study was conducted within the ANDROMEDA cohort (women of age 46-67 attending BC screening). Pre-diagnostic plasma samples, information on life-styles and common BC risk factors were collected. Small-RNA sequencing was carried out on plasma samples from 65 cases and 66 controls. miR ratios associated with BC were selected by two-sample Wilcoxon test and lasso logistic regression. Subsequent assessment by RT-qPCR of the miRs contained in the selected miR ratios was carried out as a platform validation. To identify the most promising biomarkers, penalised logistic regression was further applied to candidate miR ratios alone, or in combination with non-molecular factors. Small-RNA sequencing yielded 20 candidate miR ratios associated with BC, which were further assessed by RT-qPCR. In the resulting model, penalised logistic regression selected seven miR ratios (miR-199a-3p_let-7a-5p, miR-26b-5p_miR-142-5p, let-7b-5p_miR-19b-3p, miR-101-3p_miR-19b-3p, miR-93-5p_miR-19b-3p, let-7a-5p_miR-22-3p and miR-21-5p_miR-23a-3p), together with body mass index (BMI), menopausal status (MS), the interaction term BMI * MS, life-style score and breast density. The ROC AUC of the model was 0.79 with a sensitivity and specificity of 71.9% and 76.6%, respectively. We identified biomarkers potentially useful for BC screening measured through a widespread and low-cost technique. This is the first study reporting circulating miRs for BC detection in a screening setting. Validation in a wider sample is warranted.Trial registration: The Andromeda prospective cohort study protocol was retrospectively registered on 27-11-2015 (NCT02618538).

A randomised controlled trial of digital breast tomosynthesis vs digital mammography as primary screening tests: Screening results over subsequent episodes of the Proteus Donna study.

Proteus Donna is a randomised controlled trial aimed at prospectively evaluating screening with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), including interval cancer detection (ICD) and cancer detection (CD) in the analysis as a cumulative measure over subsequent screening episodes. Consenting women aged 46 to 68 attending the regional Breast Screening Service were randomly assigned to conventional digital mammography (DM, control arm) or DBT in addition to DM (DBT, study arm). At the subsequent round all participants underwent DM. Thirty-six months follow-up allowed for the identification of cancers detected in the subsequent screening and interscreening interval. Relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were computed. Cumulative CD and Nelson-Aalen incidence were analysed over the follow-up period. Between 31 December 2014 and 31 December 2017, 43 022 women were randomised to DM and 30 844 to DBT. At baseline, CD was significantly higher (RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.21-1.71) in the study arm. ICD did not differ significantly between the two arms (RR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.62-1.35). At subsequent screening with DM, the CD was lower (nearly significant) in the study arm (RR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.65-1.06). Over the follow-up period, the cumulative CD (comprehensive of ICD) was slightly higher in the study arm (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.31). The Nelson-Aalen cumulative incidence over time remained significantly higher in the study arm for approximately 24 months. Benign lesions detection was higher in the study arm at baseline and lower at subsequent tests. Outcomes are consistent with a lead time gain of DBT compared to DM, with an increase in false positives and moderate overdiagnosis.

Structured reporting of x-ray mammography in the first diagnosis of breast cancer: a Delphi consensus proposal.

BACKGROUND: Radiology is an essential tool in the management of a patient. The aim of this manuscript was to build structured report (SR) Mammography based in Breast Cancer. METHODS: A working team of 16 experts (group A) was composed to create a SR for Mammography Breast Cancer. A further working group of 4 experts (group B), blinded to the activities of the group A, was composed to assess the quality and clinical usefulness of the SR final draft. Modified Delphi process was used to assess level of agreement for all report sections. Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was used to assess internal consistency and to measure quality analysis according to the average inter-item correlation. RESULTS: The final SR version was built by including n = 2 items in Personal Data, n = 4 items in Setting, n = 2 items in Comparison with previous breast examination, n = 19 items in Anamnesis and clinical context; n = 10 items in Technique; n = 1 item in Radiation dose; n = 5 items Parenchymal pattern; n = 28 items in Description of the finding; n = 12 items in Diagnostic categories and Report and n = 1 item in Conclusions. The overall mean score of the experts and the sum of score for structured report were 4.9 and 807 in the second round. The Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.82 in the second round. About the quality evaluation, the overall mean score of the experts was 3.3. The Cronbach's alpha (Cα) correlation coefficient was 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: Structured reporting improves the quality, clarity and reproducibility of reports across departments, cities, countries and internationally and will assist patient management and improve breast health care and facilitate research.

Low-grade screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ progresses more slowly than high-grade lesions: evidence from an international multi-centre study.

PURPOSE: Nuclear grade is an important indicator of the biological behaviour of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). De-escalation of treatment has been suggested for low-grade DCIS. Our aim is to estimate the relative rate of progression of DCIS by nuclear grade by analysing the distribution of nuclear grade by detection at initial or subsequent screening. METHODS: We asked International Cancer Screening Network sites to complete, based on their screening and clinical databases, an aggregated data file on DCIS detection, diagnosis and treatment. RESULTS: Eleven screening programs reported 5068 screen-detected pure DCIS in nearly 7 million screening tests in women 50-69 years of age. For all programs combined, low-grade DCIS were 20.1% (range 11.4-31.8%) of graded DCIS, intermediate grade 31.0% and high grade 48.9%. Detection rates decreased more steeply from initial to subsequent screening in low compared to high-grade DCIS: the ratios of subsequent to initial detection rates were 0.39 for low grade, 0.51 for intermediate grade, and 0.75 for high grade (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the duration of the preclinical detectable phase is longer for low than for high-grade DCIS. The findings from this large multi-centre, international study emphasize that the management of low-grade DCIS should be carefully scrutinized in order to minimize overtreatment of screen-detected slow-growing or indolent lesions. The high variation by site in the proportion of low grade suggests that further pathology standardization and training would be beneficial.

Reducing harms from treatment. Sixteen years of surgery of the axilla for screen-detected breast cancers in Italy.

OBJECTIVES: Available evidence on axillary surgery has accumulated dramatically in the last two decades in favor of less invasive care. The aim of this paper is to study 16-years trends in the surgical management of the axilla in a large population-based data set of screen-detected breast cancers in Italy and to document at what extent recommendations have been adopted in actual clinical care. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study documenting the surgical management of the axilla in primary breast cancer patients over time. We retrieved from the Italian database of screen-detected cancers 41213 cases diagnosed in women aged 50-69 between years 2000 and 2015 in twelve Italian Regions. RESULTS: In pN0 cases, an increasing trend (p < 0.001) in the number of patients who received sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as the only axillary staging procedure was observed. In pN + cases SLNB was the only staging procedure in an increasing number of patients (p < 0.001) especially since the publication of the ACOSOG-Z0011 paper. In ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) SLNB was more frequent in mastectomies and in high grade and large lesions. However, 45% of low grade, small DCIS over the whole time period had some form of axillary surgery. CONCLUSION: This large series of screen-detected cases documents a strong time trend in the direction of reducing axillary surgery and hence potential harms from treatment. The continuing practice of SLNB in low risk DCIS is of concern in an era of increasing awareness towards overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

The professional quality criteria of Italian breast screening radiologists: results from a national survey comparing the programmes started in 2000-2012 versus the ones started in 1990-1999.

INTRODUCTION: In Italy, due to increasing healthcare budget and staff shortages, the recently created regional mammography screening programmes were established under worse radiology practice quality criteria than the previously created programmes. METHODS: Using available data from a national questionnaire survey conducted at the end of 2013 and involving 222 responder radiologists, we compared the main professional quality standards of radiologists working in the screening programmes established during the period 2000-2012 with those working in the screening programmes created from 1990 to 1999. RESULTS: The former reported more years of clinical experience in breast imaging and a greater clinical mammogram reading volume than the latter. Conversely, they dedicated less working time to breast imaging, were less likely to participate in the diagnostic assessment of screen-detected lesions, to work in large-staffed screening centres, and to have a screening and a total mammogram reading volume (SMRV and TMRV) ≥ 5000 per year. CONCLUSIONS: The level of most professional quality criteria of Italian mammography screening radiologists has decreased over time. As SMRV and TMRV are important predictors of diagnostic accuracy, we can expect a lower interpretation performance of radiologists working in the recently created screening programmes.

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): recommendations from the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by the Italian Society of Medical Radiology (SIRM) and the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa).

This position paper, issued by ICBR/SIRM and GISMa, summarizes the evidence on DBT and provides recommendations for its use. In the screening setting, DBT in adjunct to digital mammography (DM) increased detection rate by 0.5-2.7‰ and decreased false positives by 0.8-3.6% compared to DM alone in observational and double-testing experimental studies. The reduction in recall rate could be less prominent in those screening programs which already have low recall rates with DM. The increase in radiation exposure associated with DM/DBT protocols has been solved by the introduction of synthetic mammograms (sDM) reconstructed from DBT datasets. Thus, whenever possible, sDM/DBT should be preferred to DM/DBT. However, before introducing DBT as a routine screening tool for average-risk women, we should wait for the results of randomized controlled trials and for a statistically significant and clinically relevant reduction in the interval cancer rate, hopefully associated with a reduction in the advanced cancer rate. Otherwise, a potential for overdiagnosis and overtreatment cannot be excluded. Studies exploring this issue are ongoing. Screening of women at intermediate risk should follow the same recommendations, with particular protocols for women with previous BC history. In high-risk women, if mammography is performed as an adjunct to MRI or in the case of MRI contraindications, sDM/DBT protocols are suggested. Evidence exists in favor of DBT usage in women with clinical symptoms/signs and asymptomatic women with screen-detected findings recalled for work-up. The possibility to perform needle biopsy or localization under DBT guidance should be offered when DBT-only findings need characterization or surgery.

Recommendations for breast imaging follow-up of women with a previous history of breast cancer: position paper from the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa) and the Italian College of Breast Radiologists (ICBR) by SIRM.

Women who were previously treated for breast cancer (BC) are an important particular subgroup of women at intermediate BC risk. Their breast follow-up should be planned taking in consideration a 1.0-1.5 % annual rate of loco-regional recurrences and new ipsilateral or contralateral BCs during 15-20 years, and be based on a regional/district invitation system. This activity should be carried out by a Department of Radiology integrating screening and diagnostics in the context of a Breast Unit. We recommend the adoption of protocols dedicated to women previously treated for BC, with a clear definition of responsibilities, methods for invitation, site(s) of visits, methods for clinical and radiological evaluation, follow-up duration, role and function of family doctors and specialists. These women will be invited to get a mammogram in dedicated sessions starting from the year after the end of treatment. The planned follow-up duration will be at least 10 years and will be defined on the basis of patient's age and preferences, taking into consideration organizational matters. Special agreements can be defined in the case of women who have their follow-up planned at other qualified centers. Dedicated screening sessions should include: evaluation of familial/personal history (if previously not done) for identifying high-risk conditions which could indicate a different screening strategy; immediate evaluation of mammograms by one or, when possible, two breast radiologists with possible addition of supplemental mammographic views, digital breast tomosynthesis, clinical breast examination, breast ultrasound; and prompt planning of possible further workup. Results of these screening sessions should be set apart from those of general female population screening and presented in dedicated reports. The following research issues are suggested: further risk stratification and effectiveness of follow-up protocols differentiated also for BC pathologic subtype and molecular classification, and evaluation of different models of survivorship care, also in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Surgical resection margins after breast-conserving surgery: Senonetwork recommendations.

This paper reports findings of the "Focus on Controversial Areas" Working Party of the Italian Senonetwork, which was set up to improve the care of breast cancer patients. After reviewing articles in English on the MEDLINE system on breast conserving surgery for invasive carcinoma, the Working Party presents their recommendations for identifying risk factors for positive margins, suggests how to manage them so as to achieve the highest possible percentage of negative margins, and proposes standards for investigating resection margins and therapeutic approaches according to margin status. When margins are positive, approaches include re-excision, mastectomy, or, as second-line treatment, radiotherapy with a high boost dose. When margins are negative, boost administration and its dose depend on the risk of local recurrence, which is linked to biopathological tumor features and surgical margin width. Although margin status does not affect the choice of systemic therapy, it may delay the start of chemotherapy when further surgery is required.

Factors associated with breast screening radiologists' annual mammogram reading volume in Italy.

PURPOSE: Screening mammogram reading volume (SMRV) and total (screening and clinical) mammogram reading volume (TMRV) per year are strongly associated with the radiologist's diagnostic performance in breast cancer screening. The current article reports the prevalence and correlates of a SMRV and a TMRV ≥5000 among Italian breast screening radiologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire survey was carried out in 2013-2014 by the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (GISMa). The questionnaire included items of information for radiologist's experience-related characteristics and for facility-level factors supposedly associated with SMRV and TMRV. Multivariate analysis was performed using backward stepwise multiple logistic regression models. RESULTS: Data for 235 radiologists from 51 local screening programmes were received. Of the 222 radiologists who were eligible, 133 (59.9 %) reported a SMRV ≥5000 and 163 (73.4 %) a TMRV ≥5000. Multivariate factors positively associated with both characteristics included: the number of years of experience reading mammograms; the percentage of total working time dedicated to breast imaging and breast care; the participation in diagnostic assessment; and the availability of digital tomosynthesis at facility. Full-time dedication to breast imaging and breast care was associated with the highest odds ratio for a SMRV and a TMRV ≥5000, i.e. 11.80 and 46.74, respectively, versus a percentage of time ≤50 %. An early (<2000) year of implementation of the screening programme and the availability of vacuum-assisted biopsy at facility were associated with a SMRV and, respectively, a TMRV ≥5000. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing the proportion of radiologists with full-time dedication to breast imaging and breast care qualified as the most effective approach to improve SMRV and TMRV.

Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset.

OBJECTIVES: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset. METHODS: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from nine centers and six different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. A panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (κ) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification. RESULTS: While the agreement of individual radiologists with the PMR ranged from κ = 0.483 to κ = 0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92 %). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (κ = 0.620, standard deviation [SD] = 0.140), individual versus PMR (κ = 0.736, SD = 0.117), and individual versus ABDE (κ = 0.674, SD = 0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (κ = 0.831). CONCLUSIONS: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation. KEY POINTS: Individual BD assessment differs from PMR with κ as low as 0.483. An ABDE correctly classified 92 % of mammograms with almost perfect agreement (κ = 0.831). An ABDE can be a valid alternative to subjective BD assessment.

Mammographic breast cancer screening in Italy: 2011-2012 survey.

This report is an update of a number of papers that have been published by the ONS (Osservatorio nazionale screening, National centre for screening monitoring) since 2002. Data for the survey come from several programmes that may have changed over time, and may have different settings of organization and management. During 2011-2012, a slight increase in actual extension was recorded compared to the previous years. Currently, all Italian regions have implemented screening programmes. In 2011-2012, almost 5,300,000 women aged 50-69 years were invited to have a screening mammogram, and almost 3,000,000 were screened.While potential extension was 94.4%, actual extension was 73.3%. An imbalance in extension is still present when comparing northern and central Italy, that have an actual screening extension of 94% and 86% respectively, to southern Italy, that has less than 40%. During the last few years, participation rates have been substantially stable, at around 56%for crude rate, and 60% for adjusted rate, respectively. Women actually screened during 2011-2012 were 38.9%of the national target population. Referral rates of 9.2%at first screening and 4.7%at repeat screening were recorded, showing an increasing trend in recent years. Detection rate was 4.8x1,000 at first screening and 4.4x1,000 at repeat screening, while benign to malignant surgical biopsy ratio for first and repeat screening was 0.2 and 0.1, respectively. Detection rate of small (≤10 mm) invasive cancers was 1.3x1,000 at first screening and 1.4x1,000 at repeat screening; the proportion of in situ carcinomas was 13.3%and 12.0%for first and repeat screening, respectively. Indicators by 5-year age group confirm greater diagnostic problems at younger ages (50-54 years), with higher referral rates and a substantially lower detection rate as compared to older age groups.

Audit system on Quality of breast cancer diagnosis and Treatment (QT): results of quality indicators on screen-detected lesions in Italy, 2011-2012.

This annual survey, conducted by the Italian group for mammography screening (GISMa), collects individual data on diagnosis and treatment of about 50% of screen-detected, operated lesions in Italy. The 2011-2012 results show good overall quality and an improving trend over time. A number of critical issues have been identified, including waiting times (which have had a worsening trend over the years) and compliance with the recommendation of not performing frozen section examination on small lesions. Pre-operative diagnosis improved constantly over time, but there is still a large variation between Regions and programmes. For almost 90% of screen-detected invasive cancers a sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy was performed on the axilla, avoiding a large number of potentially harmful dissections. On the other hand, potential overuse of SLN dissection for ductal carcinoma in situ, although apparently starting to decline, deserves further investigation. The detailed results have been distributed, among other ways by means of a web-based data-warehouse, to regional and local screening programmes, in order to allow multidisciplinary discussion and identification of the appropriate solutions to any issues documented by the data. The problem of waiting times should be assigned priority. Specialist Breast Units with adequate case volume and enough resources would provide the best setting for making monitoring effective in producing quality improvements with shorter waiting times.

Problems, solutions, and perspectives in the evaluation of interval cancers in Italian mammography screening programmes: a position paper from the Italian group for mammography screening (GISMa).

In this position paper, a self-convened team of experts from the Italian Group for Mammography Screening (Gruppo italiano screening mammografico, GISMa) pointed out the problems that increasingly hamper the feasibility and validity of the estimate of the proportional incidence of interval breast cancer (IBC) in Italy, suggested potential solutions and an agenda for research, and proposed that the question of the sensitivity of mammography be viewed in a larger perspective, with a greater attention to radiological review activities and breast radiology quality assurance programmes. The main problems are as follows: the coverage of cancer registration is incomplete; the robustness of using the pre-screening incidence rates as underlying rates decreases with time since the start of screening; the intermediate mammograms performed for early detection purposes may cause an overrepresentation of IBCs; the classification of many borderline screening histories is prone to subjectivity; and, finally, the composition of cohorts of women with negative screening results is uncertain, because several mammography reports are neither clearly negative nor clearly positive, and because of the limitations and instability of the electronic mammography records. Several possibilities can be considered to cope with these issues: standard methods for using the hospital discharge records in the identification of IBCs should be established; for the calculation of regional estimates of the underlying incidence, a suitable mathematical model should be identified; the definition of IBC according to the 2008 GISMa guidelines needs to be updated, especially with respect to in situ cancers and to invasive cancers with borderline screening histories; a closer adherence to standard screening protocols, with a simplified patient management, would make it easier to objectively identify IBCs; alternative methods for estimating the sensitivity of mammography should be taken into consideration; and, finally, analysis could be restricted to the absolute incidence rate of IBC, which would make comparison of the risk between neighbouring populations possible. Epidemiologists must extend their attention to the prevention of the risk of IBC and the implementation of breast radiology quality assurance practices. Epidemiologists and radiologists can share common objectives: it is necessary to promote the idea that the availability of a registry-based series of IBCs is not a prerequisite for their radiological review; radiological review of breast cancers greater than 20mm in size detected at second and subsequent screens, that are potential substitutes for IBCs, needs radiological and epidemiological validation studies; the advent of digital mammography brings about the possibility to create libraries of mammograms accessible online, which enables the conduct of large studies of the diagnostic variability of radiologists; and, finally, epidemiologists and radiologists have the responsibility to monitor the effects that a loss of cumulative professional experience in screening centres, due to the imminent retirement of a substantial proportion of healthcare workforce, could cause on their performance.

Variation in detection of ductal carcinoma in situ during screening mammography: a survey within the International Cancer Screening Network.

BACKGROUND: There is concern about detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in screening mammography. DCIS accounts for a substantial proportion of screen-detected lesions but its effect on breast cancer mortality is debated. The International Cancer Screening Network conducted a comparative analysis to determine variation in DCIS detection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected during 2004-2008 on number of screening examinations, detected breast cancers, DCIS cases and Globocan 2008 breast cancer incidence rates derived from national or regional cancer registers. We calculated screen-detection rates for breast cancers and DCIS. RESULTS: Data were obtained from 15 screening settings in 12 countries; 7,176,050 screening examinations; 29,605 breast cancers and 5324 DCIS cases. The ratio between highest and lowest breast cancer incidence was 2.88 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.76-3.00); 2.97 (95% CI 2.51-3.51) for detection of breast cancer; and 3.49 (95% CI 2.70-4.51) for detection of DCIS. CONCLUSIONS: Considerable international variation was found in DCIS detection. This variation could not be fully explained by variation in incidence nor in breast cancer detection rates. It suggests the potential for wide discrepancies in management of DCIS resulting in overtreatment of indolent DCIS or undertreatment of potentially curable disease. Comprehensive cancer registration is needed to monitor DCIS detection. Efforts to understand discrepancies and standardise management may improve care.

Compliance with clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer treatment: a population-based study of quality-of-care indicators in Italy.

BACKGROUND: It has been documented that variations exist in breast cancer treatment despite wide dissemination of clinical practice guidelines. The aim of this population-based study was to evaluate the impact of regional guidelines (Piedmont guidelines, PGL) for breast cancer diagnosis and treatment on quality-of-care indicators in the Northwestern Italian region of Piedmont. METHODS: We included two samples of women aged 50-69 years with incident breast cancer treated in Piedmont before and after the introduction of PGL: 600 in 2002 (pre-PGL) and 621 in 2004 (post-PGL). Patients were randomly selected among all incident breast cancer cases identified through the hospital discharge records database. We extracted clinical data on breast cancer cases from medical charts and ascertained vital status through linkage with town offices. We assessed compliance with 14 quality-of-care indicators from PGL recommendations, before and after their introduction in clinical practice. RESULTS: Among patients with invasive lesions, 77.1% (N = 368) and 77.5% (N = 383) in the pre-PGL and post-PGL groups, respectively, received breast conservative surgery (BCS) as a first-line treatment. Following BCS, 87.7% received radiotherapy in 2002, compared to 87.9% in 2004. Of all patients at medium-to-high risk of distant metastasis, 65.5% (N = 268) and 63.6% (N = 252) received chemotherapy in 2002 and in 2004, respectively. Among the 117 patients with invasive lesions and negative estrogen receptor status in 2002, hormonal therapy was prescribed in 23 of them (19.6%). The incorrect prescription of hormonal therapy decreased to 10.8% (N = 10) among the 92 estrogen receptor-negative patients in 2004 (p < 0.01).Compliance with PGL recommendations was already high in the pre-PGL group, although some quality-of-care indicators did not reach the standard. In the pre/post analysis, 8 out of 14 quality-of-care indicators showed an improvement from 2002 to 2004, but only 4 out of 14 reached statistical significance. We did not find any change in the risk of mortality in the post-PGL versus the pre-PGL group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94, 95%CI 0.56-1.56). CONCLUSIONS: These results highlight the need to continue to improve breast cancer care and to measure adherence to PGL.