Cancer Screening Among Patients With Advanced Cancer | Breast Cancer | JAMA | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 35.175.212.130. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Edwards BK, Ward E, Kohler BA,  et al.  Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2006, featuring colorectal cancer trends and impact of interventions (risk factors, screening, and treatment) to reduce future rates.  Cancer. 2010;116(3):544-57319998273PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Berry DA, Cronin KA, Plevritis SK,  et al; Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) Collaborators.  Effect of screening and adjuvant therapy on mortality from breast cancer.  N Engl J Med. 2005;353(17):1784-179216251534PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
 Physician Quality Reporting Initiative (PQRI). http://www.cms.gov/PQRI/. Accessed September 19, 2010
4.
Cronin KA, Yu B, Krapcho M,  et al.  Modeling the dissemination of mammography in the United States.  Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16(6):701-71216049809PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Armstrong K, Moye E, Williams S, Berlin JA, Reynolds EE. Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians.  Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(7):516-52617404354PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Elmore JG, Armstrong K, Lehman CD, Fletcher SW. Screening for breast cancer.  JAMA. 2005;293(10):1245-125615755947PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Zauber AG, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Knudsen AB, Wilschut J, van Ballegooijen M, Kuntz KM. Evaluating test strategies for colorectal cancer screening: a decision analysis for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Ann Intern Med. 2008;149(9):659-66918838717PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Swan J, Breen N, Coates RJ, Rimer BK, Lee NC. Progress in cancer screening practices in the United States: results from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey.  Cancer. 2003;97(6):1528-154012627518PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
 US Preventive Services Task Force's Guidelines for Early Detection of Cancer. http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstopics.htm. Accessed September 19, 2010
10.
 American Cancer Society Guidelines for Early Detection of Cancer. http://www.cancer.org/Healthy/FindCancerEarly/CancerScreeningGuidelines/american-cancer-society-guidelines-for-the-early-detection-of-cancer. Accessed September 19, 2010
11.
Welch GH. Should I Be Tested for Cancer? Maybe Not and Here's Why. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2004
12.
National Cancer Institute.  SEER-Medicare: Medicare enrollment and claims data. http://www.healthservices.cancer.gov/seermedicare/medicare. Accessed September 19, 2010
13.
Warren JL, Klabunde CN, Schrag D, Bach PB, Riley GF. Overview of the SEER-Medicare data: content, research applications, and generalizability to the United States elderly population.  Med Care. 2002;40(8):(suppl)  IV-3-IV-1812187163PubMedGoogle Scholar
14.
 AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 6th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2002
15.
SEER Program.  Localized/regional/distant stage adjustments. http://seer.cancer.gov/seerstat/variables/seer/yr1973_2004/lrd_stage/. Accessed September 19, 2010
16.
 International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revisionhttp://www.icd9data.com/. Accessed September 19, 2010
17.
 CPT Standard Edition: Current Procedural Terminology. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association Press; 2007
18.
Groman R, Ginsburg J.American College of Physicians.  Racial and ethnic disparities in health care: a position paper of the American College of Physicians.  Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(3):226-23215289223PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Bach PB, Pham HH, Schrag D, Tate RC, Hargraves JL. Primary care physicians who treat blacks and whites.  N Engl J Med. 2004;351(6):575-58415295050PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Jerant AF, Fenton JJ, Franks P. Determinants of racial/ethnic colorectal cancer screening disparities.  Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(12):1317-132418574089PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Sirovich BE, Welch HG. Cervical cancer screening among women without a cervix.  JAMA. 2004;291(24):2990-299315213211PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Keating NL, Landrum MB, Rogers SO Jr,  et al.  Physician factors associated with discussions about end-of-life care.  Cancer. 2010;116(4):998-100620066693PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Back AL, Arnold RM. Dealing with conflict in caring for the seriously ill: “it was just out of the question”.  JAMA. 2005;293(11):1374-138115769971PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Rousseau P. Death denial.  J Clin Oncol. 2000;18(23):3998-399911099331PubMedGoogle Scholar
25.
Woloshin S, Schwartz LM. The benefits and harms of mammography screening: understanding the trade-offs.  JAMA. 2010;303(2):164-16520068211PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Welch HG. Overdiagnosis and mammography screening.  BMJ. 2009;339:b142519589820PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Fowler FJ Jr, Welch HG. Enthusiasm for cancer screening in the United States.  JAMA. 2004;291(1):71-7814709578PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Esserman L, Shieh Y, Thompson I. Rethinking screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer.  JAMA. 2009;302(15):1685-169219843904PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
29.
Jørgensen KJ, Gøtzsche PC. Overdiagnosis in publicly organised mammography screening programmes: systematic review of incidence trends.  BMJ. 2009;339:b258719589821PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Etzioni R, Penson DF, Legler JM,  et al.  Overdiagnosis due to prostate-specific antigen screening: lessons from U.S. prostate cancer incidence trends.  J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94(13):981-99012096083PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
31.
Walter LC, Covinsky KE. Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making.  JAMA. 2001;285(21):2750-275611386931PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Iglehart JK. Finding money for health care reform: rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse.  N Engl J Med. 2009;361(3):229-23119516025PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
33.
Partridge AH, Winer EP. On mammography: more agreement than disagreement.  N Engl J Med. 2009;361(26):2499-250119940286PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Truog RD. Screening mammography and the “r” word.  N Engl J Med. 2009;361(26):2501-250319940292PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Grady D. Quandary with mammograms: get a screening, or just skip it? New York Times. November 3, 2009:Second Opinion. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/health/03second.html?_r=1. Accessed September 19, 2010
36.
Crewdson J. Rethinking the mammogram guidelines. Atlantic. November 19, 2009. http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/11/rethinking-the-mammogram-guidelines/7791/. Accessed September 19, 2010
Original Contribution
October 13, 2010

Cancer Screening Among Patients With Advanced Cancer

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York (Drs Sima and Panageas); and Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts (Dr Schrag).

JAMA. 2010;304(14):1584-1591. doi:10.1001/jama.2010.1449
Abstract

Context Cancer screening has been integrated into routine primary care but does not benefit patients with limited life expectancy.

Objective To evaluate the extent to which patients with advanced cancer continue to be screened for new cancers.

Design, Setting, and Participants Utilization of cancer screening procedures (mammography, Papanicolaou test, prostate-specific antigen [PSA], and lower gastrointestinal [GI] endoscopy) was assessed in 87 736 fee-for-service Medicare enrollees aged 65 years or older diagnosed with advanced lung, colorectal, pancreatic, gastroesophageal, or breast cancer between 1998 and 2005, and reported to one of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) tumor registries. Participants were followed up until death or December 31, 2007, whichever came first. A group of 87 307 Medicare enrollees without cancer were individually matched by age, sex, race, and SEER registry to patients with cancer and observed over the same period to evaluate screening rates in context. Demographic and clinical characteristics associated with screening were also investigated.

Main Outcome Measure For each cancer screening test, utilization rates were defined as the percentage of patients who were screened following the diagnosis of an incurable cancer.

Results Among women following advanced cancer diagnosis compared with controls, at least 1 screening mammogram was received by 8.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.6%-9.1%) vs 22.0% (95% CI, 21.7%-22.5%); Papanicolaou test screening was received by 5.8% (95% CI, 5.6%-6.1%) vs 12.5% (95% CI, 12.2%-12.8%). Among men following advanced cancer diagnosis compared with controls, PSA test was received by 15.0% (95% CI, 14.7%-15.3%) vs 27.2% (95% CI, 26.8%-27.6%). For all patients following advanced diagnosis compared with controls, lower GI endoscopy was received by 1.7% (95% CI, 1.6%-1.8%) vs 4.7% (95% CI, 4.6%-4.9%). Screening was more frequent among patients with a recent history of screening (16.2% [95% CI, 15.4%-16.9%] of these patients had mammography, 14.7% [95% CI, 13.7%-15.6%] had a Papanicolaou test, 23.3% [95% CI, 22.6%-24.0%] had a PSA test, and 6.1% [95% CI, 5.2%-7.0%] had lower GI endoscopy).

Conclusion A sizeable proportion of patients with advanced cancer continue to undergo cancer screening tests that do not have a meaningful likelihood of providing benefit.

×