乳腺癌易感基因变异不确定的女性癌症筛查、预防和治疗的应用

IF 14.8 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY
Sarah M Nielsen, Emily M Russell, Rachel E Ellsworth, Kevin S Hughes, Brandie Heald, Peter D Beitsch, Chad Moretz, Daniel E Pineda-Alvarez, Edward D Esplin, Robert L Nussbaum, Flavia M Facio, Allison W Kurian
{"title":"乳腺癌易感基因变异不确定的女性癌症筛查、预防和治疗的应用","authors":"Sarah M Nielsen, Emily M Russell, Rachel E Ellsworth, Kevin S Hughes, Brandie Heald, Peter D Beitsch, Chad Moretz, Daniel E Pineda-Alvarez, Edward D Esplin, Robert L Nussbaum, Flavia M Facio, Allison W Kurian","doi":"10.6004/jnccn.2025.7011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The presence of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) should not influence clinical management; however, prior studies on breast cancer-related health care utilization in women with VUS versus negative germline genetic test results have shown conflicting findings. This study evaluated whether receipt of a VUS influences breast cancer-related health care utilization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This large study analyzed health care utilization and costs in women who underwent clinical multigene panel testing (MGPT) between 2015 and 2023 at a single commercial laboratory with ≥2 years of health insurance claims data available. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance modalities, as well as the associated health care costs, between women with VUS or negative MGPT results after the return of test findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 50,657 eligible women (mean age, 47.7 years), most were White (66.8%), had a family history of cancer (87.0%), and had commercial insurance (71.1%). Among 22,699 patients with breast cancer, those with VUS showed no differences from those with negative results in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance procedures or in the adjusted cost of surgical procedures after genetic testing. Among 27,958 cancer-free women, those with negative results had modestly lower mammography use (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9) compared with those with VUS. Breast cancer screening and treatment costs were no higher for women with VUS versus negative results, but were up to 10 times higher for those with positive results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large, real-world sample of women with breast cancer and without any cancer, use of cancer treatments, surveillance, and risk-reducing measures did not differ between patients with VUS versus negative results, except for modestly higher mammography use. These findings offer reassurance that VUS results do not lead to overutilization or increased cost of health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":17483,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network","volume":" ","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utilization of Cancer Screening, Prevention, and Treatment in Women With Variants of Uncertain Significance in Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah M Nielsen, Emily M Russell, Rachel E Ellsworth, Kevin S Hughes, Brandie Heald, Peter D Beitsch, Chad Moretz, Daniel E Pineda-Alvarez, Edward D Esplin, Robert L Nussbaum, Flavia M Facio, Allison W Kurian\",\"doi\":\"10.6004/jnccn.2025.7011\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The presence of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) should not influence clinical management; however, prior studies on breast cancer-related health care utilization in women with VUS versus negative germline genetic test results have shown conflicting findings. This study evaluated whether receipt of a VUS influences breast cancer-related health care utilization.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This large study analyzed health care utilization and costs in women who underwent clinical multigene panel testing (MGPT) between 2015 and 2023 at a single commercial laboratory with ≥2 years of health insurance claims data available. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance modalities, as well as the associated health care costs, between women with VUS or negative MGPT results after the return of test findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 50,657 eligible women (mean age, 47.7 years), most were White (66.8%), had a family history of cancer (87.0%), and had commercial insurance (71.1%). Among 22,699 patients with breast cancer, those with VUS showed no differences from those with negative results in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance procedures or in the adjusted cost of surgical procedures after genetic testing. Among 27,958 cancer-free women, those with negative results had modestly lower mammography use (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9) compared with those with VUS. Breast cancer screening and treatment costs were no higher for women with VUS versus negative results, but were up to 10 times higher for those with positive results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In a large, real-world sample of women with breast cancer and without any cancer, use of cancer treatments, surveillance, and risk-reducing measures did not differ between patients with VUS versus negative results, except for modestly higher mammography use. These findings offer reassurance that VUS results do not lead to overutilization or increased cost of health care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":14.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2025.7011\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2025.7011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:不确定意义变异(VUS)的存在不应影响临床管理;然而,先前关于VUS妇女乳腺癌相关医疗保健利用与种系基因检测阴性结果的研究显示了相互矛盾的结果。本研究评估接受VUS是否会影响乳腺癌相关医疗保健的利用。方法:这项大型研究分析了2015年至2023年间在单个商业实验室接受临床多基因面板检测(MGPT)的女性的医疗保健利用和成本,并提供了≥2年的健康保险索赔数据。使用多变量logistic回归来评估VUS或MGPT阴性妇女在检查结果返回后对手术、治疗、降低风险和监测模式的接受程度以及相关医疗费用的差异。结果:在50,657名符合条件的女性(平均年龄47.7岁)中,大多数是白人(66.8%),有癌症家族史(87.0%),有商业保险(71.1%)。在22,699例乳腺癌患者中,VUS患者与阴性结果患者在接受手术、治疗、降低风险和监测程序或基因检测后外科手术调整费用方面没有差异。在27958名无癌妇女中,阴性结果的妇女使用乳房x光检查的比例略低(优势比,0.9;95% CI, 0.8-0.9)。与阴性结果相比,VUS妇女的乳腺癌筛查和治疗费用并不高,但阳性结果的妇女的乳腺癌筛查和治疗费用高达10倍。结论:在一个真实世界的乳腺癌女性和无任何癌症的大样本中,VUS患者与阴性结果患者使用癌症治疗、监测和降低风险措施的情况没有差异,除了乳房x光检查的使用略有增加。这些发现为VUS结果不会导致过度使用或增加医疗保健费用提供了保证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Utilization of Cancer Screening, Prevention, and Treatment in Women With Variants of Uncertain Significance in Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes.

Background: The presence of variants of uncertain significance (VUS) should not influence clinical management; however, prior studies on breast cancer-related health care utilization in women with VUS versus negative germline genetic test results have shown conflicting findings. This study evaluated whether receipt of a VUS influences breast cancer-related health care utilization.

Methods: This large study analyzed health care utilization and costs in women who underwent clinical multigene panel testing (MGPT) between 2015 and 2023 at a single commercial laboratory with ≥2 years of health insurance claims data available. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess differences in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance modalities, as well as the associated health care costs, between women with VUS or negative MGPT results after the return of test findings.

Results: Of 50,657 eligible women (mean age, 47.7 years), most were White (66.8%), had a family history of cancer (87.0%), and had commercial insurance (71.1%). Among 22,699 patients with breast cancer, those with VUS showed no differences from those with negative results in the uptake of surgical, therapeutic, risk-reducing, and surveillance procedures or in the adjusted cost of surgical procedures after genetic testing. Among 27,958 cancer-free women, those with negative results had modestly lower mammography use (odds ratio, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.8-0.9) compared with those with VUS. Breast cancer screening and treatment costs were no higher for women with VUS versus negative results, but were up to 10 times higher for those with positive results.

Conclusions: In a large, real-world sample of women with breast cancer and without any cancer, use of cancer treatments, surveillance, and risk-reducing measures did not differ between patients with VUS versus negative results, except for modestly higher mammography use. These findings offer reassurance that VUS results do not lead to overutilization or increased cost of health care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
388
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JNCCN—Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network is a peer-reviewed medical journal read by over 25,000 oncologists and cancer care professionals nationwide. This indexed publication delivers the latest insights into best clinical practices, oncology health services research, and translational medicine. Notably, JNCCN provides updates on the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology® (NCCN Guidelines®), review articles elaborating on guideline recommendations, health services research, and case reports that spotlight molecular insights in patient care. Guided by its vision, JNCCN seeks to advance the mission of NCCN by serving as the primary resource for information on NCCN Guidelines®, innovation in translational medicine, and scientific studies related to oncology health services research. This encompasses quality care and value, bioethics, comparative and cost effectiveness, public policy, and interventional research on supportive care and survivorship. JNCCN boasts indexing by prominent databases such as MEDLINE/PubMed, Chemical Abstracts, Embase, EmCare, and Scopus, reinforcing its standing as a reputable source for comprehensive information in the field of oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信