Disparities in surveillance imaging after breast conserving surgery for primary DCIS.

Authors

null

Danalyn Byng

Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands

Danalyn Byng , Valesca P. Retel , Wim van Harten , Christel N. Rushing , Samantha M. Thomas , Thomas Lynch , Anne McCarthy , Amanda B. Francescatti , Elizabeth S. Frank , Ann H. Partridge , Alastair Mark Thompson , Lars Grimm , Terry Hyslop , Eun-Sil Shelley Hwang , Marc D Ryser

Organizations

Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, Duke University Medical Center, Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Durham, NC, Duke University, Durham, NC, American College of Surgeons, Chicago, IL, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Lexington, MA, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC

Research Funding

Other Foundation
PCORI (PCS-1505-30497, CER-1503-29572), Other Foundation, Cancer Research United Kingdom

Background: Due to the elevated risk of ipsilateral invasive breast cancer (iIBC) after diagnosis with primary ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), professional guidelines recommend surveillance screening within 6-12 months (mo) after completion of initial local treatment and annually thereafter. To characterize adherence to these guidelines, we explored longitudinal patterns of utilization and factors associated with the use of surveillance imaging (mammography, MRI, ultrasound) for women with primary DCIS treated with breast conserving surgery (BCS) ± radiotherapy (RT) within 6 mo of diagnosis. Methods: A treatment-stratified random sample of patients diagnosed with screen-detected and biopsy-confirmed DCIS in 2008-15 was selected from 1,330 Commission on Cancer-accredited facilities (up to 20/site) in the US. All imaging exams coded as asymptomatic were collected from 6 mo up to 10 years (yr) post-diagnosis. Time was defined according to 12-mo long surveillance periods. To be included in a given surveillance period, women had to be alive and free of a new breast cancer diagnosis through the end of the period. Women were classified as “consistent” screeners if they had at least one surveillance screen during each period, for the first 5 yr post-treatment or until censoring, whichever occurred first. Repeated measures multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations was used to model receipt of surveillance breast imaging over time. The model included clinical and socioeconomic features. Results: The final analytic cohort contained 12,559 women; 8,989 (71.6%) received RT after BCS. Median age was 60 yr (interquartile range: 52-69) and median follow-up was 5.6 yr (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6-5.7). Among women who received BCS (instead of BCS+RT), 62.5% (79.7%) underwent surveillance imaging within 6-18 mo after diagnosis. 38.7% (54.0%) were categorized as “consistent” screeners. Compared to white women, Black women were less likely to receive surveillance screening after treatment for primary DCIS (odds ratio [OR] 0.85, 95% CI 0.77-0.94). Hispanic ethnicity had a similar association (OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-0.99) compared to non-Hispanic ethnicity. Women with private insurance, compared to government insurance, were more likely to receive screening (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.11-1.30). Prognostic tumor features indicative of a higher risk of subsequent iIBC, including higher grade, presence of comedonecrosis, and hormone receptor-negative DCIS, were not associated with screening uptake. Conclusions: Despite guidelines recommending annual surveillance imaging, many women with primary DCIS do not undergo regular imaging after BCS. The findings from this US-based study suggest that disparities in screening uptake are associated with race/ethnicity and insurance status rather than prognostic tumor features.

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

2021 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Discussion Session

Session Title

Health Services Research and Quality Improvement

Track

Quality Care/Health Services Research

Sub Track

Access to Care

Citation

J Clin Oncol 39, 2021 (suppl 15; abstr 6516)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2021.39.15_suppl.6516

Abstract #

6516

Abstract Disclosures