Dataset Information

Assessment of fracture risk in women with breast cancer using current vs emerging guidelines.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Breast cancer (BC) therapies can have negative effects on bone. Current guidelines recommend antiresorptive therapy based on bone mineral density (BMD), and emerging guidelines include both clinical risk factors and BMD to assess the overall fracture risk. A retrospective, case-controlled study based on current and emerging guidelines was conducted in women with newly diagnosed BC to identify those who were at increased fracture risk based on current and emerging guidelines. METHODS: Baseline characteristics, fracture risk factors, and lumbar-spine (LS) and total-hip BMD in women with BC (88 premenopausal and 402 postmenopausal) were assessed to determine who would receive bisphosphonate therapy based on current and emerging guidelines. RESULTS: Among patients with estrogen-receptor-positive (ER(+)) BC, 18.8% of premenopausal and 36.9% of postmenopausal women were osteopenic at LS. In the postmenopausal cohort, osteoporosis was more prevalent in patients with ER(+) vs ER(-) BC. Current guidelines identified 8.9% of patients as eligible for antiresorptive therapy, clinical risk factors alone identified 6.5%, and BMD plus clinical risk factors identified 28.6%. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to fracture risk factors present at BC diagnosis, cancer therapies leading to BMD loss further increase fracture risk. Evaluating both BMD and clinical risk factors may allow more effective identification of BC patients with elevated fracture risk.

SUBMITTER: Hadji P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2837568 | biostudies-other | 2010 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Among 377,561 female Medicare beneficiaries who sustained a fracture, 10% had another fracture within 1 year, 18% within 2 years, and 31% within 5 years. Timely management to reduce risk of subsequent fracture is warranted following all nontraumatic fractures, including nonhip nonvertebral fractures, in older women.IntroductionPrior fracture is a strong predictor of subsequent fracture; however, postfracture treatment rates are low. Quantifying imminent (12-24 month) risk of subsequent fracture in older women may clarify the need for early postfracture management.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study used Medicare administrative claims data. Women ≥ 65 years who sustained a clinical fracture (clinical vertebral and nonvertebral fracture; index date) and were continuously enrolled for 1-year pre-index and ≥ 1-year (≥ 2 or ≥ 5 years for outcomes at those time points) post-index were included. Cumulative incidence of subsequent fracture was calculated from 30 days post-index to 1, 2, and 5 years post-index. For appendicular fractures, only those requiring hospitalization or surgical repair were counted. Death was considered a competing risk.ResultsAmong 377,561 women (210,621 and 10,969 for 2- and 5-year outcomes), cumulative risk of subsequent fracture was 10%, 18%, and 31% at 1, 2, and 5 years post-index, respectively. Among women age 65-74 years with initial clinical vertebral, hip, pelvis, femur, or clavicle fractures and all women ≥ 75 years regardless of initial fracture site (except ankle and tibia/fibula), 7-14% fractured again within 1 year depending on initial fracture site; risk rose to 15-26% within 2 years and 28-42% within 5 years. Risk of subsequent hip fracture exceeded 3% within 5 years in all women studied, except those < 75 years with an initial tibia/fibula or ankle fracture.ConclusionsWe observed a high and early risk of subsequent fracture following a broad array of initial fractures. Timely management with consideration of pharmacotherapy is warranted in older women following all fracture types evaluated.

Project description:ImportanceMany US radiologists have screening mammography recall rates above the expert-recommended threshold of 12%. The influence of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) on the distribution of radiologist recall rates is uncertain.ObjectiveTo evaluate radiologists' recall and cancer detection rates before and after beginning interpretation of DBT examinations.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included 198 radiologists from 104 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium who interpreted 251?384 DBT and 2?000?681 digital mammography (DM) screening examinations from 2009 to 2017, including 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations during the study period and 72 (36.4%) who exclusively interpreted DM examinations (to adjust for secular trends). Data were analyzed from April 2018 to July 2019.ExposuresDigital breast tomosynthesis and DM screening examinations.Main outcomes and measuresRecall rate and cancer detection rate.ResultsA total of 198 radiologists interpreted 2?252?065 DM and DBT examinations (2?000?681 [88.8%] DM examinations; 251?384 [11.2%] DBT examinations; 710?934 patients [31.6%] aged 50-59 years; 1?448?981 [64.3%] non-Hispanic white). Among the 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations, 83 (65.9%) had unadjusted DM recall rates of no more than 12% before using DBT, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 10.0% (7.5%-13.0%). On DBT examinations, 96 (76.2%) had an unadjusted recall rate of no more than 12%, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 8.8% (6.3%-11.3%). A secular trend in recall rate was observed, with the multivariable-adjusted risk of recall on screening examinations declining by 1.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.5%) per year. After adjusting for examination characteristics and secular trends, recall rates were 15% lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). Adjusted recall rates were significantly lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use for 45 radiologists (35.7%) and significantly higher for 18 (14.3%); 63 (50.0%) had no statistically significant change. The unadjusted cancer detection rate on DBT was 5.3 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 5.0-5.7 per 1000 examinations) compared with 4.7 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 4.6-4.8 per 1000 examinations) on DM examinations interpreted before DM use (multivariable-adjusted risk ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33).Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, DBT was associated with an overall decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. However, our results indicated that there is wide variability among radiologists, including a subset of radiologists who experienced increased recall rates on DBT examinations. Radiology practices should audit radiologist DBT screening performance and consider additional DBT training for radiologists whose performance does not improve as expected.

Dataset Information

Assessment of fracture risk in women with breast cancer using current vs emerging guidelines.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets