Affiliations
AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
Impact of the New Jersey Breast Density Law on Imaging and Intervention Volumes and Breast Cancer DiagnosisLinda M Sanders et al. J Am Coll Radiol. 2016 Oct.
. 2016 Oct;13(10):1189-1194. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.05.005. Epub 2016 Jun 16. AffiliationsItem in Clipboard
AbstractPurpose: Increased breast density is acknowledged as an independent risk factor for breast cancer and may obscure malignancy on mammography. Approximately half of all mammograms depict dense breasts. Legislation related to mandatory breast density notification was first enacted in Connecticut in 2009. On May 1, 2014, New Jersey joined other states with similar legislation. The New Jersey breast density law (NJBDL) mandates that mammography reports acknowledge the relevance and masking effect of mammographic breast density. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the NJBDL at one of the state's largest ACR-accredited breast centers.
Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to determine changes in imaging and intervention utilization and modality of cancer diagnosis after enactment of the legislation. Data for the present study were extracted from a review of all patients with core biopsy-proven malignancy at a large outpatient breast center between November 1, 2012, and October 31, 2015. Data were divided into the 18-month period before the implementation of the NJBDL (November 1, 2012 to April 30, 2014) and the 18-month period after passage of the law (May 1, 2014 to October 31, 2015).
Results: Screening ultrasound increased significantly after the implementation of the NJBDL, by 651% (1,530 vs 11,486). MRI utilization increased by 59.3% (2,595 vs 4,134). A total of 1,213 cancers were included in the final analysis, 592 in the first time period and 621 after law implementation. Breast cancer was most commonly detected on screening mammography, followed by diagnostic mammography with ultrasound for palpable concern, in both time periods. Of the 621 cancers analyzed, 26.1% (n = 162) were found in patients 50 years of age or younger. Results demonstrated that with respect to how malignancies were detected, age and average mammographic density were both statistically significant (P = .002).
Conclusions: The NJBDL succeeded in publicizing the masking effect of dense breasts. The number of supplemental screening ultrasound and MRI examinations increased after the implementation of this legislation. An efficacy analysis affirmed the high sensitivity of screening MRI compared with other modalities. The use of MRI increased core biopsy efficiency and reduced the number of biopsies needed per cancer diagnosed.
Keywords: Breast; MRI; breast cancer; density; imaging; risk; screening.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articlesBahl M, Baker JA, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Brandt EK, Ghate SV. Bahl M, et al. Radiology. 2016 Sep;280(3):701-6. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2016152457. Epub 2016 Mar 28. Radiology. 2016. PMID: 27018643
[No authors listed] [No authors listed] Radiol Technol. 2016 Nov;88(2):189CT-192CT. Radiol Technol. 2016. PMID: 27837145 No abstract available.
Nyante SJ, Marsh MW, Benefield T, Earnhardt K, Lee SS, Henderson LM. Nyante SJ, et al. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020 Jan;17(1 Pt A):6-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2019.05.054. Epub 2019 Jul 1. J Am Coll Radiol. 2020. PMID: 31271735 Free PMC article.
Huang S, Houssami N, Brennan M, Nickel B. Huang S, et al. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021 May;187(1):11-30. doi: 10.1007/s10549-021-06203-w. Epub 2021 Mar 28. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2021. PMID: 33774734 Review.
Butler RS, Hooley RJ. Butler RS, et al. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020 Jun;214(6):1424-1435. doi: 10.2214/AJR.19.22275. Epub 2020 Mar 17. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2020. PMID: 32182096 Review.
Aminawung JA, Hoag JR, Kyanko KA, Xu X, Richman IB, Busch SH, Gross CP. Aminawung JA, et al. Cancer Med. 2020 Aug;9(15):5662-5671. doi: 10.1002/cam4.3218. Epub 2020 Jun 14. Cancer Med. 2020. PMID: 32537899 Free PMC article.
Lee Argov EJ, Rodriguez CB, Agovino M, Schmitt KM, Desperito E, Karr AG, Wei Y, Terry MB, Tehranifar P. Lee Argov EJ, et al. Cancer Causes Control. 2024 Aug;35(8):1133-1142. doi: 10.1007/s10552-024-01871-7. Epub 2024 Apr 12. Cancer Causes Control. 2024. PMID: 38607569
Marsh MW, Benefield TS, Lee S, Pritchard M, Earnhardt K, Agans R, Henderson LM. Marsh MW, et al. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021 Apr;30(4):579-586. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2020.8528. Epub 2020 Sep 22. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021. PMID: 32960137 Free PMC article.
Fleury EFC, Gianini AC, Marcomini K, Oliveira V. Fleury EFC, et al. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2018 Jan 1;17:1533033818763461. doi: 10.1177/1533033818763461. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2018. PMID: 29551088 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
Pirikahu S, Lund H, Cadby G, Wylie E, Stone J. Pirikahu S, et al. Breast Cancer Res. 2022 Jan 15;24(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s13058-021-01499-4. Breast Cancer Res. 2022. PMID: 35033155 Free PMC article.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3