Receipt of Screening Mammography by Insured Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer and Impact on Outcomes

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine; and
  • | 2 Hutchinson Institute for Cancer Outcomes Research, and
  • | 3 Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington.

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with receipt of screening mammography by insured women before breast cancer diagnosis, and subsequent outcomes. Patients and Methods: Using claims data from commercial and federal payers linked to a regional SEER registry, we identified women diagnosed with breast cancer from 2007 to 2017 and determined receipt of screening mammography within 1 year before diagnosis. We obtained patient and tumor characteristics from the SEER registry and assigned each woman a socioeconomic deprivation score based on residential address. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations of patient and tumor characteristics with late-stage disease and nonreceipt of mammography. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to identify predictors of subsequent mortality. Results: Among 7,047 women, 69% (n=4,853) received screening mammography before breast cancer diagnosis. Compared with women who received mammography, those with no mammography had a higher proportion of late-stage disease (34% vs 10%) and higher 5-year mortality (18% vs 6%). In multivariable modeling, late-stage disease was most associated with nonreceipt of mammography (odds ratio [OR], 4.35; 95% CI, 3.80–4.98). The Cox model indicated that nonreceipt of mammography predicted increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 2.00; 95% CI, 1.64–2.43), independent of late-stage disease at diagnosis (HR, 5.00; 95% CI, 4.10–6.10), Charlson comorbidity index score ≥1 (HR, 2.75; 95% CI, 2.26–3.34), and negative estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor status (HR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.67–2.61). Nonreceipt of mammography was associated with younger age (40–49 vs 50–59 years; OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.45–1.96) and increased socioeconomic deprivation (OR, 1.05 per decile increase; 95% CI, 1.03–1.07). Conclusions: In a cohort of insured women diagnosed with breast cancer, nonreceipt of screening mammography was significantly associated with late-stage disease and mortality, suggesting that interventions to further increase uptake of screening mammography may improve breast cancer outcomes.

Submitted August 15, 2020; final revision received December 20, 2020; accepted for publication December 21, 2020. Published online July 30, 2021.

Author contributions: Data acquisition: J.M. Lee, Malone, Ramsey. Data analysis: Lawson, C.I. Lee, Hippe, Chennupati, Fedorenko, Malone, J.M. Lee. Manuscript preparation: All authors.

Disclosures: Dr. C.I. Lee has disclosed receiving grant/research support from and serves on a data safety monitoring board for GRAIL, Inc., and receives royalties from McGraw Hill, Inc., Wolters Kluwer, and Oxford University Press. Mr. Hippe has disclosed receiving grant/research support from GE Healthcare, Philips Healthcare, Canon Medical Systems USA, and Siemens Healthineers. Dr. J.M. Lee has disclosed receiving grant/research support from GE Healthcare. The remaining authors have disclosed that they have no financial interests, arrangements, affiliations, or commercial interests with the manufacturers of any products discussed in this article or their competitors.

Funding: Research reported in this publication was supported by the NCI of the NIH under award number P30 CA015704-43 (J.M. Lee).

Disclaimer: The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.

Correspondence: Janie M. Lee, MD, MSc, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, 1144 Eastlake Avenue East, LG2-200, Seattle, WA 98109. Email: jmlee58@uw.edu

Supplementary Materials

    • Supplemental Materials (PDF 434 KB)
  • 1.

    Guo F, Kuo YF, Shih YCT, et al. Trends in breast cancer mortality by stage at diagnosis among young women in the United States. Cancer 2018;124:35003509.

  • 2.

    Henley SJ, Ward EM, Scott S, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part I: national cancer statistics. Cancer 2020;126: 22252249.

  • 3.

    Kaplan HG, Malmgren JA, Atwood MK, et al. Effect of treatment and mammography detection on breast cancer survival over time: 1990-2007. Cancer 2015;121:25532561.

  • 4.

    Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK, et al. Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005;353:17841792.

  • 5.

    Nelson HD, Fu R, Cantor A, et al. Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:244255.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Plevritis SK, Munoz D, Kurian AW, et al. Association of screening and treatment with breast cancer mortality by molecular subtype in US women, 2000-2012. JAMA 2018;319:154164.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Lobb R, Ayanian JZ, Allen JD, et al. Stage of breast cancer at diagnosis among low-income women with access to mammography. Cancer 2010;116:54875496.

  • 8.

    Selvin E, Brett KM. Breast and cervical cancer screening: sociodemographic predictors among White, Black, and Hispanic women. Am J Public Health 2003;93:618623.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Henley SJ, Thomas CC, Lewis DR, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part II: progress toward Healthy People 2020 objectives for 4 common cancers. Cancer 2020;126:22502266.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Nelson HD, Weerasinghe R, Wang L, et al. Mammography screening in a large health system following the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations and the Affordable Care Act. PLoS One 2015;10:e0131903.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Final recommendation statement. Breast cancer: screening. Accessed October 27, 2020. Available at: https://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf/recommendation/breast-cancer-screening

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Oeffinger KC, Fontham ET, Etzioni R, et al. Breast cancer screening for women at average risk: 2015 guideline update from the American Cancer Society. JAMA 2015;314:15991614.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Abbott BC, Duncan EF, Grady HI, et al. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Breast Cancer. Version 1.2018. Accessed March 15, 2018. To view the most recent version, visit NCCN.org

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Lee CH, Dershaw DD, Kopans D, et al. Breast cancer screening with imaging: recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging and the ACR on the use of mammography, breast MRI, breast ultrasound, and other technologies for the detection of clinically occult breast cancer. J Am Coll Radiol 2010;7:1827.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. Cancer surveillance system (CSS). Accessed June 23, 2020. Available at: https://www.fredhutch.org/en/research/divisions/public-health-sciences-division/research/epidemiology/cancer-surveillance-system.html

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    National Cancer Institute. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Accessed June 23, 2020. Available at: https://seer.cancer.gov

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2010.

  • 18.

    Miglioretti DL, Zhu W, Kerlikowske K, et al. Breast tumor prognostic characteristics and biennial vs annual mammography, age, and menopausal status. JAMA Oncol 2015;1:10691077.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision. Accessed June 23, 2020. Available at: https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en

  • 20.

    International Classification of Diseases: Ninth Revision. Basic Tabulation List With Alphabetic Index. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 1978.

  • 21.

    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373383.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Kind AJ, Jencks S, Brock J, et al. Neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and 30-day rehospitalization: a retrospective cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:765774.

  • 23.

    U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Documentation: 2010 Rural-Urban Commuting Area (RUCA) codes. Accessed January 19, 2020. Available at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-commuting-area-codes/documentation/

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Singh GK. Area deprivation and widening inequalities in US mortality, 1969-1998. Am J Public Health 2003;93:11371143.

  • 25.

    American Medical Association. CPT overview and code approval. Accessed June 23, 2020. Available at: https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/cpt/cpt-overview-and-code-approval

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26.

    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. HCPCS coding questions. Accessed June 23, 2020. Available at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/MedHCPCSGenInfo/HCPCS_Coding_Questions

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27.

    Cole AP, Lu C, Krimphove MJ, et al. Comparing the association between insurance and mortality in ovarian, pancreatic, lung, colorectal, prostate, and breast cancers. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2019;17:10491058.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28.

    Ward E, Halpern M, Schrag N, et al. Association of insurance with cancer care utilization and outcomes. CA Cancer J Clin 2008;58:931.

  • 29.

    Zhang Y, Franzini L, Chan W, et al. Effects of health insurance on tumor stage, treatment, and survival in large cohorts of patients with breast and colorectal cancer. J Health Care Poor Underserved 2015;26:13361358.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30.

    Donegan WL. Tumor-related prognostic factors for breast cancer. CA Cancer J Clin 1997;47:2851.

  • 31.

    Seshadri R, Firgaira FA, Horsfall DJ, et al. Clinical significance of HER-2/neu oncogene amplification in primary breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1993;11:19361942.

  • 32.

    Howlader N, Cronin KA, Kurian AW, et al. Differences in breast cancer survival by molecular subtypes in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2018;27:619626.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33.

    Anderson RT, Yang TC, Matthews SA, et al. Breast cancer screening, area deprivation, and later-stage breast cancer in Appalachia: does geography matter? Health Serv Res 2014;49:546567.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 34.

    Kurani SS, McCoy RG, Lampman MA, et al. Association of neighborhood measures of social determinants of health with breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates in the US Midwest. JAMA Netw Open 2020;3:e200618.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35.

    Siu AL, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 2016;164:279296

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36.

    Qin X, Tangka FK, Guy GP Jr, et al. Mammography rates after the 2009 revision to the United States Preventive Services Task Force breast cancer screening recommendation. Cancer Causes Control 2017;28:4148.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37.

    Wang AT, Fan J, Van Houten HK, et al. Impact of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines on screening mammography rates on women in their 40s. PLoS One 2014;9:e91399.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38.

    Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Yood MU, et al. Reason for late-stage breast cancer: absence of screening or detection, or breakdown in follow-up? J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:15181527.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 39.

    Rosenberg RD, Haneuse SJ, Geller BM, et al. Timeliness of follow-up after abnormal screening mammogram: variability of facilities. Radiology 2011;261:404413.

  • 40.

    Sprague BL, Miglioretti DL, Lee CI, et al. New mammography screening performance metrics based on the entire screening episode. Cancer 2020;126:32893296.

  • 41.

    Wharam JF, Zhang F, Wallace J, et al. Vulnerable and less vulnerable women in high-deductible health plans experienced delayed breast cancer care. Health Aff (Millwood) 2019;38: 408415.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 42.

    Chlebowski RT, Kim J, Haque R. Adherence to endocrine therapy in breast cancer adjuvant and prevention settings. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2014;7:378387.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 43.

    Farias AJ, Du XL. Association between out-of-pocket costs, race/ethnicity, and adjuvant endocrine therapy adherence among Medicare patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2017;35:8695.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 44.

    Sheppard VB, He J, Sutton A, et al. Adherence to adjuvant endocrine therapy in insured black and white breast cancer survivors: exploring adherence measures in patient data. J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2019;25:578586.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 45.

    Noone AM, Lund JL, Mariotto A, et al. Comparison of SEER treatment data with Medicare claims. Med Care 2016;54:e5564.

  • 46.

    Heller SL, Rosenkrantz AB, Gao Y, et al. County-level factors predicting low uptake of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2018;211:624629.

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 1078 1078 29
PDF Downloads 488 488 18
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0