Treatment variation by insurance status for breast cancer patients.
ABSTRACT Few studies have examined the relationship of insurance status with the presentation and treatment of breast cancer. Using a state cancer registry, we compared tumor presentation and surgical treatments at presentation by insurance status (private insurance, Medicare, Medicaid, or uninsured). Student's t-test, Chi-square test, and ANOVA were used for comparison. P-values reflect a comparison to insured patients. From 1996 to 2005, there were 6876 cases of invasive breast cancer with either private (n = 3975), Medicare (n = 2592), Medicaid (n = 193), or no insurance (n = 116). The median age (years) at presentation was 55 for private, 76 for Medicare, 54 for Medicaid and 54 for uninsured. The mean and median tumor size (mm) were 18.5 and 15 for private; 20.9 and 15 for Medicare; 24.2 and 18 for Medicaid; and 29.5 and 17 for uninsured, respectively; (p < 0.001 for all). Fewer women with Medicare and Medicaid presented with node negative breast cancers: private, 73.4% node negative; Medicare, 79.5% (p < 0.001); Medicaid, 60.9% (p < 0.001); and uninsured, 58% (p = 0.005). Significantly more uninsured women had no surgical treatment of their breast cancer: 15.5% versus 4.3% for private (p < 0.001). Among women with non-metastatic T1/T2 tumors, 71.5% with private insurance underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS), compared with 64.2% of Medicare (p < 0.001), 65% of Medicaid (p = 0.097), and 65.4% of uninsured (p = 0.234). The rate of reconstruction following mastectomy was higher for private insurance (36.6%), compared with Medicare (3.8%, p < 0.0001), Medicaid (26.1%, p = 0.31), and uninsured (5.0%, p = 0.0038). The presentation of breast cancer in women with no insurance and Medicaid is significantly worse than those with private insurance. Of concern are the lower proportions of BCS and reconstruction among patients who are uninsured or have Medicaid. Reduction of disparities in breast cancer presentation and treatment may be possible by increasing enrollment of uninsured, program-eligible women in a state-supported screening and treatment program.
- SourceAvailable from: Blake Cady[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Mortality reduction from mammographic screening is controversial. Individual randomized trials and meta-analyses demonstrate statistically significant mortality reductions in all age groups invited to screening. In women actually screened, mortality reductions are greater. Individual trials and meta-analyses show varying rates of mortality reduction, leading to questions about screening's value and whether treatment advances have diminished the importance of early detection. This study hypothesized that breast cancer deaths predominantly occurred in unscreened women. Invasive breast cancers diagnosed between 1990 and 1999 were followed through 2007. Data included demographics, mammography use, surgical and pathology reports, and recurrence and death dates. Mammograms were categorized as screening or diagnostic based on absence or presence of breast signs or symptoms, and were substantiated by medical records. Breast cancer deaths were defined after documentation of prior distant metastases. Absence of recurrent cancer and lethal other diseases defined death from other causes. Invasive breast cancer failure analysis defined 7301 patients between 1990 and 1999, with 1705 documented deaths from breast cancer (n = 609) or other causes (n = 905). Among 609 confirmed breast cancer deaths, 29% were among women who had been screened (19% screen-detected and 10% interval cancers), whereas 71% were among unscreened women, including > 2 years since last mammogram (6%), or never screened (65%). Overall, 29% of cancer deaths were screened, whereas 71% were unscreened. Median age at diagnosis of fatal cancers was 49 years; in deaths not from breast cancer, median age at diagnosis was 72 years. Most deaths from breast cancer occur in unscreened women. To maximize mortality reduction and life-years gained, initiation of regular screening before age 50 years should be encouraged. Cancer 2013. © 2013 American Cancer Society.Cancer 09/2013; · 5.20 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Hormone receptor-positive (HR+) cancers account for most breast cancer diagnoses and deaths. Among survivors with HR + breast cancers, endocrine therapy (ET) reduces 5-year risk of recurrence by up to 40 %. Observational studies in Medicare- and privately-insured survivors suggest underutilization of ET. We sought to characterize ET use in a low-income Medicaid-insured population in North Carolina.Journal of Cancer Survivorship 05/2014; 8(4). · 3.29 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Surgical management of breast cancer has evolved considerably over the last two decades. There has been a major shift toward less-invasive local treatments, from radical mastectomy to breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS). In order to investigate the efficacy of each of the three abovementioned methods, a literature review was conducted for measurable outcomes including local recurrence, survival, cosmetic outcome, quality of life (QOL), and health economy. From the point of view of oncological result, there is no difference between mastectomy and BCT in local recurrence rate and survival. Long-term results for OBS are not available. The items assessed in the QOL sound a better score for OBS in comparison with mastectomy or BCT. OBS is also associated with a better cosmetic outcome. Although having low income seems to be associated with lower BCT and OBS utilization, prognosis of breast cancer is worse in these women as well. Thus, health economy is the matter that should be studied seriously. OBS is an innovative, progressive, and complicated subspeciality that lacks published randomized clinical trials comparing surgical techniques and objective measures of outcome, especially from oncologic and health economy points of view.ISRN oncology. 01/2013; 2013:742462.