Identifying benchmarks for ASCO's “Choosing Wisely” measures that address low-value imaging in early-stage prostate and breast cancer.

Authors

null

Steve Power

Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC

Steve Power, Rhonda Lynn Bitting, P. Kelly Marcom, Arif Kamal

Organizations

Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, Duke Cancer Institute and Center for Learning Healthcare at Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC

Research Funding

No funding sources reported

Background: ASCO has recently selected “Choosing Wisely” measures that identify physician health behaviors of low value in cancer care. Two of these measures address the use of advanced imaging for early stage disease. These measures aim to reduce imaging in patients at low risk for metastatic disease unless there is a clinical indication. To date, no evidence-based benchmarks for meeting these measures have been reported. Methods: We analyzed all patients from January 2010 to June 2012 at the Duke Cancer Institute (DCI), an NCI-designated, comprehensive cancer center. We investigated conformance to two Choosing Wisely measures: avoiding imaging for staging in early stage (ES) prostate cancer (PC) and ES breast cancer (BC). ES was defined by Choosing Wisely as Stage IIb or less for BC and Gleason <7 or PSA <10 ng/mL for PC. Advanced imaging was defined as bone scan, computed tomography (CT) scan, or positron emission tomography (PET) performed at the DCI within 60 days of cancer diagnosis. Descriptive statistics and chi-square were performed. Results: Total 1143 BC and 29 PC were identified. Median age was 58 and 61 years, respectively. 0% (0/29) of PC cases had advanced imaging. Within BC, 20.6% (235/1143) had at least one imaging procedure performed; 16.5% had two or more. Patients with imaging were more likely hormone receptor negative, triple negative, younger (<50), and higher stage (Stage IIb), (all p<0.0001). Of imaging performed in BC, 41% were CT only, 22% were PET or PET/CT, and 36% were bone scans. Ongoing chart abstractions are identifying clinical indications for the ordering of imaging and associated clinical consequences. Conclusions: We have established internal benchmarks for conformance to two Choosing Wisely measures. The lack of advanced imaging for low-risk PC patients demonstrates the feasibility of this measure even in a multi-disciplinary setting. Imaging in <25% low-risk BC patients suggests that these are performed for clinical rather than staging purposes. Further data sharing and comparisons are needed to establish oncology-wide benchmarks.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2013 ASCO Quality Care Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

General Poster Session B: Practice of Quality and Health Reform

Track

Practice of Quality,Health Reform: Implications for Costs and Quality

Sub Track

Learning from Projects Done in a Health System

Citation

J Clin Oncol 31, 2013 (suppl 31; abstr 194)

Abstract #

194

Poster Bd #

C18

Abstract Disclosures

Similar Abstracts

First Author: Michael Leapman

First Author: Eva Lengyelova

First Author: Ashanda Rosetta Patrice Esdaille