Dataset Information

Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

ABSTRACT: The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) collected data on intended management before and after PET in cancer patients. We have previously reported that PET was associated with a change in intended management of about one third of patients and was consistent across cancer types. It is uncertain if intended management plans reflect the actual care these patients received. One approach to assess actual care received is using administrative claims to categorize the type and timing of clinical services.NOPR data from 2006 to 2008 were linked to Medicare claims for consenting patients aged 65 y or older undergoing initial-staging PET scanning for bladder, ovarian, pancreatic, small cell lung, or stomach cancers. We determined the 60-d agreement between claims-inferred care and NOPR treatment plans.Patients (n = 4,661) were assessed, and 30%-52% had metastatic disease. Planned treatments were about two-thirds monotherapy, of which 46% was systemic therapy only, and one-third combinations. Claims paid by 60 d confirmed the NOPR plan of any systemic therapy, radiotherapy, or surgery in 79.3%, 64.7%, and 63.6%, respectively. Single-mode plans were much more often confirmed: systemic therapy in more than 85% of patients with ovarian, pancreatic, and small cell lung cancers and surgery in more than 73% of those with bladder, pancreatic, and stomach cancers. Intended combination treatments had claims for both in only 28% of patients receiving surgery-based combinations and in 55% receiving chemoradiotherapy. About 90% of patients with NOPR-planned systemic therapy had evaluation or management claims from a medical oncologist. An age of less than 75 y was associated more often with confirmation of chemotherapy, less often for radiotherapy but not with confirmation of surgery. Performance status or comorbidity did not explain confirmation rates within action categories, but confirmation rates were higher if the referrer specialized in the planned treatment.Claims confirmations of NOPR intent for initial staging were widely variable but were higher than previously reported for restaging PET, suggesting that measuring change in intended management is a reasonable method for assessing the impact diagnostic tests have on actual care.

SUBMITTER: Hillner BE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3851922 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Hillner Bruce E BE Tosteson Anna N AN Tosteson Tor D TD Wang Qianfei Q Song Yunjie Y Hanna Lucy G LG Siegel Barry A BA

Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine 20131112 12

<h4>Unlabelled</h4>The National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) collected data on intended management before and after PET in cancer patients. We have previously reported that PET was associated with a change in intended management of about one third of patients and was consistent across cancer types. It is uncertain if intended management plans reflect the actual care these patients received. One approach to assess actual care received is using administrative claims to categorize the type and tim ...[more]

PMID: 24221994

Similar Datasets

Project description:We have previously reported that PET with 18F-fluoride (NaF PET) for assessment of osseous metastatic disease led to changes in intended management in a substantial fraction of patients with prostate or other types of cancer participating in the National Oncologic PET Registry. This study was performed to assess the concordance of intended patient management after NaF PET and inferred management based on analysis of Medicare claims. Methods: We analyzed linked post-NaF PET data of consenting National Oncologic PET Registry participants age 65 y or older from 2011 to 2014 and their corresponding Medicare claims. Post-NaF PET treatment plans, including combinations of 2 modes of therapy, were assessed for their concordance with clinical actions inferred from Medicare claims. NaF PET studies were stratified by indication (initial staging [IS] or suspected first osseous metastasis [FOM]) and cancer type (prostate, lung, or other cancers). Agreement was assessed between post-NaF PET intended management plans for treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, or systemic therapy) within 90 d for lung and 180 d for prostate or other cancers, and for watching (the absence of treatment claims for ≥60 d) as compared with claims-inferred care. Results: Actions after 9,898 scans were assessed. After NaF PET for IS, there was claims agreement for planned surgery in 76.0% (19/25) lung, 75.4% (98/130) other cancers, and 58.9% (298/506) prostate cancer. Claims confirmed chemotherapy plans after NaF PET done for IS or FOM in 81.0% and 73.5% for lung cancer (n = 148 and 136) and 69.4% and 67.5% for other cancers (n = 111 and 228). For radiotherapy plans, agreement ranged from 80.0% to 84.4% after IS and 68.4% to 74.0% for suspected FOM. Concordance was greatest for androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) (86.0%, n = 308) alone or combined with radiotherapy in prostate cancer IS (80.8%, n = 517). In prostate FOM, the concordance across all treatment plans was lower if the patients had ADT claims within 180 d before NaF PET. Agreement with nontreatment plans was high for FOM (87.2% in other cancers and 78.6% if no prior ADT in prostate) and low after IS (40.7%-62.5%). Conclusion: Concordance of post-NaF PET plans and claims was substantial and higher overall for IS than for FOM.

Project description:We have previously reported that PET using 18F-fluoride (NaF PET) for assessment of osseous metastatic disease was associated with substantial changes in intended management in Medicare beneficiaries participating in the National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR). Here, we use Medicare administrative data to examine the association between NaF PET results and hospice claims within 180 d and 1-y survival. Methods: We classified NOPR NaF PET results linked to Medicare claims by imaging indication (initial staging [IS]; detection of suspected first osseous metastasis [FOM]; suspected progression of osseous metastasis [POM]; or treatment monitoring [TM]) and type of cancer (prostate, lung, breast, or other). Results were classified as definitely positive scan findings versus probably positive scan findings versus negative scan findings for osseous metastasis for IS and FOM; more extensive disease versus no change or less extensive disease for POM; and worse prognosis versus no change or better prognosis for TM, based on the postscan assessment. Our study included 21,167 scans obtained from 2011 to 2014 of consenting NOPR participants aged 65 y or older. Results: The relative risk of hospice claims within 180 d of a NaF PET scan was 2.0-7.5 times higher for patients with evidence of new or progressing osseous metastasis than for those without, depending on indication and cancer type (all P < 0.008). The percentage difference in hospice claims for those with a finding of new or more advanced osseous disease ranged from 3.9% for IS prostate patients to 28% for FOM lung patients. Six-month survival was also associated with evidence of new or increased osseous disease; risk of death was 1.8-5.1 times as likely (all P ≤ 0.0001), with percentage differences of approximately 30% comparing positive and negative scans in patients with lung cancer imaged for IS or FOM. Conclusion: Our analyses demonstrated that NaF PET scan results are highly associated with subsequent hospice claims and, ultimately, with patient survival. NaF PET provides important information on the presence of osseous metastasis and prognosis to assist patients and their physicians when making decisions on whether to select palliative care and transition to hospice or whether to continue treatment.

Project description:IntroductionWe assessed the impact of [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET) on intended management of patients in the National Oncologic PET Registry (NOPR) for three different diagnostic indications: (a) determining whether a suspicious lesion is cancer (Dx), (b) detecting an unknown primary tumor site when there is confirmed or strongly suspected metastatic disease (cancer of unknown primary origin [CUP]), and (c) detecting a primary tumor site when there is a presumed paraneoplastic syndrome (PNS).MethodsWe reviewed a sample of randomly selected reports of NOPR subjects who underwent PET for Dx and CUP and all reports for PNS to find subjects for analysis. For these studies, we evaluated the impact of PET on referring physicians' intended management, based on their management plans reported before and after PET.ResultsIntended management was changed more frequently in the CUP group (43.1%) than in the Dx (23.9%) and PNS (25.4%) groups (CUP vs. Dx, p < .0001; PNS vs. Dx, p < .0001; CUP vs. PNS, p < .0002). Referring physicians reported that, in light of PET results, they were able to avoid further testing in approximately three-fourths of patients (71.8%-74.6%). At the time when the post-PET forms were completed, biopsies of suspicious sites had been performed in 21.2%, 32.4%, and 23.2%, respectively, of Dx, CUP, and PNS cases.ConclusionOur analysis of NOPR data shows that PET appears to have a substantial impact on intended management when used for three common diagnostic indications.Implications for practice[(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography appears to have a substantial impact on intended management when used for three targeted diagnostic indications: (a) determining whether a suspicious lesion is cancer, (b) detecting an unknown primary tumor site in a patient with confirmed or strongly suspected metastatic disease, and (c) detecting a primary tumor site in a patient with a presumed paraneoplastic syndrome.

Project description:ImportanceThere are insufficient data comparing 16α-18F-fluoro-17β-estradiol (FES) positron emission tomography (PET) computed tomography (CT) with standard-of-care imaging (SOC) for staging locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) or evaluating suspected recurrence.ObjectiveTo determine the detection rate of FES PET/CT and SOC for distant metastases in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive LABC and recurrences in patients with ER-positive BC and suspected recurrence.Design, setting, and participantsThis diagnostic study was conducted as a single-center phase 2 trial, from January 2021 to September 2023. The study design provided 80% power to find a 20% detection rate difference. Participants included patients with ER-positive LABC (cohort 1) or suspected recurrence (cohort 2). Data were analyzed from September 2023 to February 2024.ExposureParticipants underwent both SOC imaging and experimental FES PET/CT. When there were suspicious lesions on imaging, 1 was biopsied for histopathological reference standard to confirm presence (true positive) or absence (false positive) of malignant neoplasm.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcome of interest was the detection rate of FES PET CT vs SOC for distant metastases and recurrences.ResultsA total of 124 patients were accrued, with 62 in cohort 1 (median [IQR] age, 52 [32-84] years) and 62 in cohort 2 (median [IQR] age, 66 [30-93] years). In cohort 1, of 14 true-positive findings, SOC imaging detected 12 and FES detected 11 (P > .99). In cohort 2, of 23 true-positive findings, SOC detected 16 and FES detected 18 (P = .77). In 30 patients with lobular histology, of 11 true-positive findings, SOC detected 5 and FES detected 9 (P = .29). There were 6 false-positive findings on SOC and 1 false-positive finding on FES PET/CT (P = .13).Conclusions and relevanceIn this diagnostic study with pathological findings as the reference standard, no difference was found between FES PET/CT and current SOC imaging for detecting distant metastases in patients with ER-positive LABC or recurrences in patients with ER-positive tumors and suspected recurrence. FES PET/CT could be considered for both clinical indications, which are not part of current Appropriate Use Criteria for FES PET. The findings regarding FES PET/CT in patients with lobular tumors, and for lower false positives than current SOC imaging, warrant further investigation.

Project description:Background18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (18F-FDG PET/MRI) may improve cancer staging by combining sensitive cancer detection with high-contrast resolution and detail. We compared the diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/MRI to 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18F-FDG PET/CT) for staging oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal cancer. Following ethical approval and informed consent, participants with newly diagnosed primary oesophageal/gastro-oesophageal cancer were enrolled. Exclusions included prior/concurrent malignancy. Following 324 ± 28 MBq 18F-FDG administration and 60-min uptake, PET/CT was performed, immediately followed by integrated PET/MRI from skull base to mid-thigh. PET/CT was interpreted by two dual-accredited nuclear medicine physicians and PET/MRI by a dual-accredited nuclear medicine physician/radiologist and cancer radiologist in consensus. Per-participant staging was compared with the tumour board consensus staging using the McNemar test, with statistical significance at 5%.ResultsOut of 26 participants, 22 (20 males; mean ± SD age 68.8 ± 8.7 years) completed 18F-FDG PET/CT and PET/MRI. Compared to the tumour board, the primary tumour was staged concordantly in 55% (12/22) with PET/MRI and 36% (8/22) with PET/CT; the nodal stage was concordant in 45% (10/22) with PET/MRI and 50% (11/22) with PET/CT. There was no statistical difference in PET/CT and PET/MRI staging performance (p > 0.05, for T and N staging). The staging of distant metastases was concordant with the tumour board in 95% (21/22) with both PET/MRI and PET/CT. Of participants with distant metastatic disease, PET/MRI detected additional metastases in 30% (3/10).ConclusionIn this preliminary study, compared to 18F-FDG PET/CT, 18F-FDG PET/MRI showed non-significant higher concordance with T-staging, but no difference with N or M-staging. Additional metastases detected by 18F-FDG PET/MRI may be of additive clinical value.

Dataset Information

Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Publications

Intended versus inferred care after PET performed for initial staging in the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets