Association between age and access to immediate breast reconstruction in women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: National guidelines state that patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in England should be offered immediate breast reconstruction (IR), unless precluded by their fitness for surgery or the need for adjuvant therapies. METHODS: A national study investigated factors that influenced clinicians' decision to offer IR, and collected data on case mix, operative procedures and reconstructive decision-making among women with breast cancer having a mastectomy with or without IR in the English National Health Service between 1 January 2008 and 31 March 2009. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between whether or not women were offered IR and their characteristics (tumour burden, functional status, planned radiotherapy, planned chemotherapy, perioperative fitness, obesity, smoking status and age). RESULTS: Of 13 225 women, 6458 (48·8 per cent) were offered IR. Among factors the guidelines highlighted as relevant to decision-making, the three most strongly associated with the likelihood of an offer were tumour burden, planned radiotherapy and performance status. Depending on the combination of their values, the probability of an IR offer ranged from 7·4 to 85·1 per cent. A regression model that included all available factors discriminated well between whether or not women were offered IR (c-statistic 0·773), but revealed that increasing age was associated with a fall in the probability of an IR offer beyond that expected from older patients' tumour and co-morbidity characteristics. CONCLUSION: Clinicians are broadly following guidance on the offer of IR, except with respect to patients' age

Mammographic density adds accuracy to both the Tyrer-Cuzick and Gail breast cancer risk models in a prospective UK screening cohort

This work was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Appeal (references GA10-033 and GA13-006). This article presents independent research funded by the NIHR under its Programme Grants for Applied Research (grant RP-PG-0707-10031). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. The authors also acknowledge the support of Medical Research Council Health eResearch Centre grant MR/K006665/1

Is computer aided detection (CAD) cost effective in screening mammography? A model based on the CADET II study

BACKGROUND: Single reading with computer aided detection (CAD) is an alternative to double reading for detecting cancer in screening mammograms. The aim of this study is to investigate whether the use of a single reader with CAD is more cost-effective than double reading. METHODS: Based on data from the CADET II study, the cost-effectiveness of single reading with CAD versus double reading was measured in terms of cost per cancer detected. Cost (Pound (£), year 2007/08) of single reading with CAD versus double reading was estimated assuming a health and social service perspective and a 7 year time horizon. As the equipment cost varies according to the unit size a separate analysis was conducted for high, average and low volume screening units. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the reading time, equipment and assessment cost, recall rate and reader qualification. RESULTS: CAD is cost increasing for all sizes of screening unit. The introduction of CAD is cost-increasing compared to double reading because the cost of CAD equipment, staff training and the higher assessment cost associated with CAD are greater than the saving in reading costs. The introduction of single reading with CAD, in place of double reading, would produce an additional cost of £227 and £253 per 1,000 women screened in high and average volume units respectively. In low volume screening units, the high cost of purchasing the equipment will results in an additional cost of £590 per 1,000 women screened.One-way sensitivity analysis showed that the factors having the greatest effect on the cost-effectiveness of CAD with single reading compared with double reading were the reading time and the reader's professional qualification (radiologist versus advanced practitioner). CONCLUSIONS: Without improvements in CAD effectiveness (e.g. a decrease in the recall rate) CAD is unlikely to be a cost effective alternative to double reading for mammography screening in UK. This study provides updated estimates of CAD costs in a full-field digital system and assessment cost for women who are re-called after initial screening. However, the model is highly sensitive to various parameters e.g. reading time, reader qualification, and equipment cost

Estimating attendance for breast cancer screening in ethnic groups in London.

BACKGROUND: Breast screening uptake in London is below the Government's target of 70% and we investigate whether ethnicity affects this. Information on the ethnicity for the individual women invited is unavailable, so we use an area-based method similar to that routinely used to derive a geographical measure for socioeconomic deprivation. METHODS: We extracted 742,786 observations on attendance for routine appointments between 2004 and 2007 collected by the London Quality Assurance Reference Centre. Each woman was assigned to a lower super output (LSOA) based on her postcode of residence. The proportions of the ethnic groups within each LSOA are known, so that the likelihood of a woman belonging to White, Black and Asian groups can be assigned. We investigated screening attendance by age group, socioeconomic deprivation using the Index of Deprivation 2004 income quintile, invitation type and breast screening service. Using logistic regression analysis we calculated odds ratios for attendance based on ethnic composition of the population, adjusting for age, socioeconomic status, the invitation type and screening service. RESULTS: The unadjusted attendance odds ratios were high for the White population (OR: 3.34 95% CI [3.26-3.42]) and low for the Black population (0.13 [0.12-0.13]) and the Asian population (0.55 [0.53-0.56]). Multivariate adjustment reduced the differences, but the Black population remained below unity (0.47 [0.44-0.50]); while the White (1.30 [1.26-1.35]) and Asian populations (1.10 [1.05-1.15]) were higher. There was little difference in the attendance between age groups. Attendance was highest for the most affluent group and fell sharply with increasing deprivation. For invitation type, the routine recall was higher than the first call. There were wide variations in the attendance for different ethnic groups between the individual screening services. CONCLUSIONS: Overall breast screening attendance is low in communities with large Black populations, suggesting the need to improve participation of Black women. Variations in attendance for the Asian population require further investigation at an individual screening service level

Protocol for reporting and publication of equipment faults in the*NHSBSP

SIGLEAvailable from British Library Document Supply Centre-DSC:GPC/08618 / BLDSC - British Library Document Supply CentreGBUnited Kingdo