Economic evaluation of supplemental breast cancer screening modalities to mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis in women with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts and average or intermediate breast cancer risk in US healthcare

References

• World Health Organization. Breast cancer. 2021. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/breast-cancer
   Google Scholar
• Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V, et al. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Instit. 2014;106(10):dju255. doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju255.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Radiology ACo. Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) ultrasound. Reston (VA): American College of Radiology; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Vachon CM, van Gils CH, Sellers TA, et al. Mammographic density, breast cancer risk and risk prediction. Breast Cancer Res. 2007;9(6):217. doi: 10.1186/bcr1829.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eriksson L, Czene K, Rosenberg LU, et al. Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res. 2013;15(3):R48. doi: 10.1186/bcr3440.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(13):1081–1087. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.13.1081.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hadadi I, Rae W, Clarke J, et al. Diagnostic performance of adjunctive imaging modalities compared to mammography alone in women with Non-Dense and dense breasts: a systematic review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Breast Cancer. 2021;21(4):278–291. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2021.03.006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(3):227–236. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa062790.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wanders JO, Holland K, Veldhuis WB, et al. Volumetric breast density affects performance of digital screening mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;162(1):95–103. doi: 10.1007/s10549-016-4090-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann RM, Athanasiou A, Baltzer PAT, et al. Breast cancer screening in women with extremely dense breasts recommendations of the european society of breast imaging (EUSOBI). Eur Radiol. 2022;32(6):4036–4045. doi: 10.1007/s00330-022-08617-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DenseBreast-info. State legislation map. 2023. https://densebreast-info.org/legislative-information/state-legislation-map/
   Google Scholar
• DenseBreast-info. FDA National Reporting Standard. 2023. https://densebreast-info.org/legislative-information/national-reporting-standard/
   Google Scholar
• Beidler LB, Kressin NR, Wormwood JB, et al. Perceptions of breast cancer risks among women receiving mammograph screening. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(1):e2252209. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.52209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu T, Warren LJ. The added value of supplemental breast ultrasound screening for women with dense breasts: a single center Canadian experience. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2022;73(1):101–106. doi: 10.1177/08465371211011707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Moy L. Contrast-enhanced MRI for breast cancer screening. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2019;50(2):377–390. doi: 10.1002/jmri.26654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cozzi A, Magni V, Zanardo M, et al. Contrast-enhanced mammography: a systematic review and Meta-Analysis of diagnostic performance. Radiology. 2022;302(3):568–581. doi: 10.1148/radiol.211412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comstock CE, Gatsonis C, Newstead GM, et al. Comparison of abbreviated breast MRI vs digital breast tomosynthesis for breast cancer detection among women with dense breasts undergoing screening. JAMA. 2020;323(8):746–756. doi: 10.1001/jama.2020.0572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Euler-Chelpin M, Lillholm M, Vejborg I, et al. Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark. Breast Cancer Res. 2019;21(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s13058-019-1203-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vegunta S, Kling JM, Patel BK. Supplemental cancer screening for women with dense breasts: guidance for health care professionals. Mayo Clin Proc. 2021;96(11):2891–2904. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2021.06.001.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EviCore H. Breast imaging guidelines. Version 1.0.2022. 2022. https://www.evicore.com/-/media/files/evicore/clinical-guidelines/evicore_breast_v102022_final_eff01012022_pub09272021.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Schünemann HJ, Lerda D, Quinn C, et al. Breast cancer screening and diagnosis: a synopsis of the european breast guidelines. Ann Intern Med. 2020;172(1):46–56. doi: 10.7326/M19-2125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Institute for Q, Efficiency in Health C. IQWiG Executive Summaries of Final Reports. Systematic Guideline Search and Appraisal, as Well as Extraction of Relevant Recommendations, for the DMP "Breast Cancer". Cologne, Germany: Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) Copyright © 2014 by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Healthcare (IQWiG). 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Lobig F, Caleyachetty A, Forrester L, et al. Performance of supplemental imaging modalities for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: findings from an umbrella review and primary studies analysis. Clinical Breast Cancer. 2023;23(5):478–490. doi: 10.1016/j.clbc.2023.04.003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussein H, Abbas E, Keshavarzi S, et al. Supplemental breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts and negative mammography: a systematic review and Meta-Analysis. Radiology. 2023;306(3):221785. doi: 10.1148/radiol.221785.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fallenberg EM, Schmitzberger FF, Amer H, et al. Contrast-enhanced spectral mammography vs. mammography and MRI - clinical performance in a multi-reader evaluation. Eur Radiol. 2017;27(7):2752–2764. doi: 10.1007/s00330-016-4650-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endrikat J, Schmidt G, Haverstock D, et al. Sensitivity of Contrast-Enhanced breast MRI vs X-ray mammography based on cancer histology, tumor grading, receptor status, and molecular subtype: a supplemental analysis of 2 large phase III studies. Breast Cancer (Auckl). 2022;16:11782234221092155. doi: 10.1177/11782234221092155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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(4):279–296. doi: 10.7326/M15-2886.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geuzinge HA, Bakker MF, Heijnsdijk EA, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021;113(11):1476–1483. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djab119.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bakker MF, de Lange SV, Pijnappel RM, et al. Supplemental MRI screening for women with extremely dense breast tissue. N Engl J Med. 2019;381(22):2091–2102. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1903986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaiser CG, Dietzel M, Vag T, et al. Cost-effectiveness of MR-mammography vs. conventional mammography in screening patients at intermediate risk of breast cancer - A model-based economic evaluation. Eur J Radiol. 2021;136:109355. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2020.109355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tollens F, Baltzer PAT, Dietzel M, et al. Cost-Effectiveness of digital breast tomosynthesis vs. Abbreviated breast MRI for screening women with intermediate risk of breast Cancer-How Low-Cost must MRI be? Cancers. 2021;13(6):1241. doi: 10.3390/cancers13061241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Greuter MJW, Vermeulen KM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of abbreviated-protocol MRI screening for women with mammographically dense breasts in a national breast cancer screening program. Breast. 2022;61:58–65. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.12.004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jochelson MS, Lobbes MBI. Contrast-enhanced mammography: state of the art. Radiology. 2021;299(1):36–48. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021201948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mainiero MB, Moy L, Baron P, et al. ACR appropriateness criteria(®) breast cancer screening. J Am Coll Radiol. 2017;14(11s):S383–s390. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2017.08.044.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American cancer society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57(2):75–89. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.57.2.75.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, et al. The eighth edition AJCC cancer staging manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more "personalized" approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(2):93–99. doi: 10.3322/caac.21388.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al. Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. Radiology. 2013;267(1):47–56. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12121373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welch HG, Prorok PC, O'Malley AJ, et al. Breast-Cancer tumor size, overdiagnosis, and mammography screening effectiveness. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(15):1438–1447. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1600249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weedon-Fekjaer H, Lindqvist BH, Vatten LJ, et al. Breast cancer tumor growth estimated through mammography screening data. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(3):R41. doi: 10.1186/bcr2092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diamond IR, Grant RC, Feldman BM, et al. Defining consensus: a systematic review recommends methodologic criteria for reporting of delphi studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(4):401–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yhec YHEC. Delphi Method [online] York 2016. https://yhec.co.uk/glossary/delphi-method/
   Google Scholar
• Akansel N, Gülşen M, Gültaş M. Influence of discomfort tolerance of women who undergo mammography on the perceived pain intensity due to the procedure. Eur J Breast Health. 2021;17(1):68–75. doi: 10.4274/ejbh.2020.6068.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CMS. Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) Look-up tool]. 2022. https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Fee-for-Service-Payment/PFSlookup
   Google Scholar
• Blumen H, Fitch K, Polkus V. Comparison of treatment costs for breast cancer, by tumor stage and type of service. Am Health Drug Benefits. 2016;9(1):23–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Viscusi K. Discouting health effects for medical decisions. New York: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Shepard DS. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. By M.R. Gold, J.E siegel, L.B. Russell, and M.C. Weinstein (eds). New York: oxford university press, 1996. J Mental Health Policy Econ. 1999;2(2):91–92. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-176X(199906)2:2<91::AID-MHP46>3.0.CO;2-I.
   Google Scholar
• Kerlikowske K, Chen S, Golmakani MK, et al. Cumulative advanced breast cancer risk prediction model developed in a screening mammography population. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2022;114(5):676–685. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djac008.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• IMV. Global imaging market outlook report. IMV Medical Information Division. 2019.
   Google Scholar
• IMV. MR Market Outlook Report © 2022 IMV, part of Science and Medicine Group. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• ICER. 2020-2023 Value Assessment Framework. Institute for Clinical and Economic Review. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Sankatsing VD, Heijnsdijk EA, van Luijt PA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of digital mammography screening before the age of 50 in The Netherlands. Int J Cancer. 2015;137(8):1990–1999. doi: 10.1002/ijc.29572.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor DB, Burrows S, Saunders CM, et al. Contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM) versus MRI for breast cancer staging: detection of additional malignant lesions not seen on conventional imaging. Eur Radiol Exp. 2023;7(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s41747-022-00318-5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National health interview survey. Cancer Trends Progress Report. 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Patel BK, Gray RJ, Pockaj BA. Potential cost savings of Contrast-Enhanced digital mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(6):W231–w237. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.17239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips J, Steinkeler J, Talati K, et al. Workflow considerations for incorporation of Contrast-Enhanced spectral mammography into a breast imaging practice. J Am Coll Radiol. 2018;15(6):881–885. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2018.02.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamal R, Mansour S, Farouk A, et al. Contrast-enhanced mammography in comparison with dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI: which modality is appropriate for whom? Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med. 2021;52(1):216. doi: 10.1186/s43055-021-00586-y.
   Google Scholar
• Houssami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(19):3248–3258. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.2108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Flynn EA, Ledger AE, deSouza NM. Alternative screening for dense breasts: MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;204(2):W141–9. doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Witowski J, Heacock L, Reig B, et al. Improving breast cancer diagnostics with artificial intelligence for MRI. medRxiv. 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Verburg E, van Gils CH, Bakker MF, et al. Computer-Aided diagnosis in multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging screening of women with extremely dense breasts to reduce False-Positive diagnoses. Invest Radiol. 2020;55(7):438–444. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0000000000000656.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang Y, Edwards AV, Newstead GM. Artificial intelligence applied to breast MRI for improved diagnosis. Radiology. 2021;298(1):38–46. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020200292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verburg E, van Gils CH, van der Velden BHM, et al. Deep learning for automated triaging of 4581 breast MRI examinations from the DENSE trial. Radiology. 2022;302(1):29–36. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203960.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jing X, Wielema M, Cornelissen LJ, et al. Using deep learning to safely exclude lesions with only ultrafast breast MRI to shorten acquisition and reading time. Eur Radiol. 2022;32(12):8706–8715. doi: 10.1007/s00330-022-08863-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veenhuizen SGA, de Lange SV, Bakker MF, et al. Supplemental breast MRI for women with extremely dense breasts: results of the second screening round of the DENSE trial. Radiology. 2021;299(2):278–286. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2021203633.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhl CK, Keulers A, Strobel K, et al. Not all false positive diagnoses are equal: on the prognostic implications of false-positive diagnoses made in breast MRI versus in mammography/digital tomosynthesis screening. Breast Cancer Res. 2018;20(1):13. doi: 10.1186/s13058-018-0937-7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar