FAVOR F actors A ssociated with V ariability O f R adiologists (2000 to present) Supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute (R01 CA-107623;

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Mobile Digital Telemammography Dr. Joseph Gitlin Presentation at The Cancer Summit Rapid City, South Dakota October 12 th, 2004.

Advertisements

Assessment of Radiologists’ Performance with CADe for Digital Mammography Elodia B. Cole, MS Medical University of South Carolina Department of Radiology.

ACRIN PA 4005: Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study of a Rapid ‘Rule-out’ Strategy Using CT Coronary Angiogram Versus Traditional Care for Low-Risk.

Breast Cancer Screening What’s New to Know? The Issue of Breast Density Catherine Babcook MD Partner, Mountain Medical Physician Specialists Medical Director.

Screening Mammography: Regret or no regret? Joint Hospital Surgical Grand Round 19 May 2007 Yvonne Tsang Prince of Wales Hospital.

ACR and SBI Statement Margarita Zuley, MD Associate Professor, Radiology Medical Director, Breast Imaging University of Pittsburgh.

National Mammography Database

Breast Density A patient guide.

The Sudden Death in the Young Registry. Screening for Sudden Cardiac Death in the Young Report from a National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Working.

Computer Aided Diagnosis: CAD overview

· Information gathering · Data analysis · Decision making · “ Human life is too important to be left to a computer “ Patients receive the best treatment.

SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY PROGRAM Screening Mammography in 2014: Still Controversial? Dr. Christine Wilson MEDICAL DIRECTOR, SCREENING MAMMOGRAPHY.

Linking Multilevel Analysis to Health Policy Interventions Richard B. Warnecke, Sarah Gehlert, Carol Ferrans, Richard Barrett, Julie Darnell, Young Cho,

¡Celebremos La Salud!: A cancer prevention program for Hispanic and non-Hispanic White women living in a rural area Silvia Tejeda, MPH Doctoral Candidate.

The Quality Management Partnership (Mammography) Dr. Rene Shumak, Clinical Lead, Mammography Independent Diagnostic Clinic Association, Sept 12, 2014.

February 13, 1997CWU B.Kovalerchuk1 DESIGN OF CONSISTENT SYSTEM FOR RADIOLOGISTS TO SUPPORT BREAST CANCER DIAGNOSIS.

Breast Imaging Made Brief and Simple

BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER CONTROL PROGRAM Emily Vance Nursing 250.

12/10/02Harry Bushar1 Computerized Thermal Imaging Breast Cancer System 2100 (CTI BCS2100) Radiological Devices Advisory Panel December 10, 2002 Statistical.

1 History and Lessons from FDA Regulation of Digital Radiology Kyle J. Myers, Ph.D. Division of Imaging and Applied Mathematics OSEL/CDRH/FDA October 22,

Disparities in Cancer September 22, Introduction Despite notable advances in cancer prevention, screening, and treatment, a disproportionate number.

MAMOGRAPHY. Mammography is the process of using low- energy X-rays (usually around 30 kVp) to examine the human breast, which is used as a diagnostic.

Preventive Health Care Use in Elderly Uterine Cancer Survivors Division of Health Policy and Management School of Public Health University of Minnesota.

Factors Associated with Bilateral vs. Unilateral Mastectomy in a Diverse, Population-based Sample of Breast Cancer Patients Sarah T. Hawley, PhD, MPH University.

Risk Prediction in Clinical Practice Joann G. Elmore MD, MPH SCCA June 11, 2014.

Outcomes Research and Diagnostic Testing Challenges and Approaches Rebecca Smith-Bindman, MD Associate Professor Radiology, Epidemiology and Biostatistics.

ACRIN Protocol 6666 ACRIN Protocol 6666 Screening Breast Ultrasound in High-Risk Women Made possible by grants from the Avon Foundation and National Cancer.

Outcomes of screening mammography among women aged 40 to 43 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences Toronto, Canada (2006)

ACRIN Breast Committee Fall Meeting : Comparison of Full-Field Digital Mammography with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Image Acquisition in Relation.

EDRN Approaches to Biomarker Validation DMCC Statisticians Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Margaret Pepe Ziding Feng, Mark Thornquist, Yingye Zheng,

Improvement in Screening Radiologists’ Performance in an Organized Screening Program Nancy A. T. Wadden, MD, FRCPC Gregory Doyle, BSc, MBA Breast Screening.

CISNET and BCSC: Working Together To Model The Population Impact Breast Cancer Screening A Celebration of the Work of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC): Impact of the BCSC What is left to be done Stephen Taplin, MD, MPH, Senior Scientist NCI/DCCPS/ARP BCSC Program.

Understanding Factors That Affect Mammography Performance: Contribution of the BCSC Bonnie C. Yankaskas, PhD Professor of Radiology University of North.

Measuring and Improving Radiologists’ Interpretative Performance on Screening Mammography Karla Kerlikowske, MD Diana Buist, PhD Patricia Carney, PhD Berta.

The HMO Research Network (HMORN) is a consortium of research centers working in close partnership with health systems. Members conduct public domain health.

REACH Lay Health Worker Intervention Program: A Community-Based Model to Promote Breast Cancer Screening Among Vietnamese-American Women Gem M. Le, MHS.

Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium: Progress in Understanding Screening Delivery and Early Detection Rachel Ballard-Barbash, MD, MPH, Associate Director,

Tolerability of Breast Cancer Screening, Diagnostic and Biopsy Procedures: An ACRIN 6666 Substudy Mark D. Schleinitz, MD, MS Dina DePalo Jeffrey Blume,

Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC): sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Cancer Screening Surveillance in Clinical Practice Tracy Onega,

Using the BCSC Research Infrastructure as a Junior Investigator BCSC Meeting: Celebrating 15 Years of Accomplishment Bethesda, MD April 27, 2010 E. Shelley.

Screening Mammography Benchmarks – Modified Angoff: Screening Performance and Guidelines for Practice  Robert D Rosenberg and Patricia Carney for Breast.

Effect of process indicators on the episode sensitivity of mammography Tytti Sarkeala, MSc Finnish Cancer Registry Ahti Anttila Matti Hakama Irma Saarenmaa.

Validation and Refinement of a Prediction Rule to Identify Children at Low Risk for Acute Appendicitis Kharbanda AB, Dudley NC, Bajaj L, et al; Pediatric.

Some Difficult Decisions are Easier without Computer Support / TA Mammography, RT Diversity / Andrey A. Povyakalo (work together with E Alberdi, L Strigini.

Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC): A Research Infrastructure sponsored by the National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Risk Models William Barlow,

ACRIN Breast Committee Fall Meeting CADe study Etta Pisano, MD Martin Yaffe PhD Elodia Cole, MS Zheng Zhang, PhD ACRIN Breast Committee.

Insights from the PROMISE Trial Neha J. Pagidipati, MD MPH; Kshipra Hemal; Adrian Coles, PhD; Daniel B. Mark, MD MPH; Rowena J. Dolor, MD MHS; Patricia.

Breast Density: Black, White and Shades of Gray Jen Rusiecki, MD VA Pittsburgh Health System Women’s Health Fellow AMWA Hot Topic 2016.

Uses of the NIH Collaboratory Distributed Research Network Jeffrey Brown, PhD for the DRN Team Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute and Harvard Medical.

Linking Electronic Health Records Across Institutions to Understand Why Women Seek Care at Multiple Sites for Breast Cancer Caroline A. Thompson, PhD,

Dr. Julia Flukinger Breast Radiologist, Director Breast MRI, Advanced Radiology May 21, 2106.

Collaboration with Community Partners to Provide Breast and Cervical Cancer Services to the Underserved University of Texas Health Sciences Center at Tyler.

Evaluation of the Community Patient Navigation Program within the Community Education and Outreach Initiative (CEOI) Patient Navigation is one strategy.

Effectiveness of Patient Navigation on Diagnostic Interval, Anxiety, and Satisfaction of Minority Women with Abnormal Mammograms: a Randomized Controlled.

COLLABORATION WITH COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO PROVIDE BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER SERVICES TO THE UNDERSERVED Patti Olusola, M.D. 1, Sarah Low, M.D. 1, Michelle.

Moving from observation to intervention Developing Interventions to Improve Mammography Interpretation: AIM Study Design sponsored by: American Cancer.

Mammography NJ digital mammography NJ women’s imaging New Jersey breast imaging New Jersey mammograms NJ breast biopsy NJ general ultrasound NJ Breast.

TMIST A Breast Cancer Screening Trial

1University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky

Mammograms and Breast Exams: When to start /stop mammograms

What do Women Know About Breast Density?

Developing a Comprehensive Site Selection Process for a Cancer Network in a Resource-Limited Settings in Sub-Saharan Africa Meg Wirth AMC Operations &

The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation

Presenter: Wen-Ching Lan

BCSC as a Platform for Comparative Effectiveness Research

The Research Question What is the evidence on diagnostic test performance and clinical outcomes of supplemental screening of women with dense breasts with.

Comparing Options for Management:PAtient-centered REsults for Uterine Fibroids Evan R. Myers, MD, MPH Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Duke Clinical.

Digital 2D versus Tomosynthesis Screening Mammography among Women Aged 65 and Older in the United States Screening mammography performance metrics are.

Performance of Dual-Energy Contrast-enhanced Digital Mammography for Screening Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer A.

Presentation transcript:

FAVOR F actors A ssociated with V ariability O f R adiologists (2000 to present) Supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute (R01 CA ; K05 CA ) and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Development of FAVOR My interest in mammography My frustration over data from academic centers and experts, not community setting Invitation from Steve Taplin to attend the 1998 BCSC meeting

FAVOR I (2000 to 2005) Specific Aims 1. Radiologists’ characteristics (new survey data collected) 2. Facility level characteristics (new survey data collected) 3. Statistical modeling Multi-site project: BCSC sites (GHC, CO, NH), the Univ of WA and Duke

Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) Marks on Screening Mammogram

Impact of CAD on Performance Recall rate Biopsies completed per 1,000 screens increased 10% to 13% (p<0.001) 15 to 18 (p<0.001) Sensitivity (% of women with cancer that have positive tests) 80% to 84% J Fenton et al., NEJM 2007

CAD Use and Overall Accuracy AUCs for facilities without vs. with CAD are vs (p=0.005). Adjusted for patient, radiologist, and facility characteristics, registry, and facility-level random effects.

Impact of CAD on Performance % of cancers that are DCIS increased with CAD 25% to 34% (p<0.04) J Fenton et al., NEJM 2007

FAVOR I Medical Malpractice Malpractice experience (N=127 MD’s) –52% reported prior claim –15% reported prior mammography related claim Malpractice effect on clinical practice –76% expressed concern about the impact on their practice –59% concerned that malpractice increased their recommendations for biopsy Elmore et al. Radiology 2005.

Radiologists’ Estimates of the 5-year risk of a breast cancer diagnosis. “A 41-year old white woman...” Calculated risk Egger et al. Med Dec Mak 2005.

FAVOR II (2006 to present) Specific Aims 1. Statistical methods 2. Radiologists’ characteristics (new survey collection) 3. Continuing Medical Education (CME) 4 BCSC sites initially Expanded to all 7 BCSC sites to gather survey data on interpretive volume and practice locations for the AIM study (Funding from the American Cancer Society/NCI)

FAVOR Involvement of Junior Investigators Medical Students –HeYon Sohng Residents –John Dick –Laurel Desnick PhD students –Gavino Puggioni –Prashni Paliwal –Carolyn Prouty –Dawn Woodard MPH students –Connie Nakano Junior Faculty Members –Amy Baernstein –John Choe –Joshua Fenton –Tom Gallagher –Sara Jackson –Hillary Liss –Shin Ping Tu

FAVOR Supplement Disclosure of Medical Errors Vignette added to FAVOR II survey on the topic of medical errors in mammography (T. Gallagher et al., Radiology 2009) Supplement funding to support qualitative research project.

Beyond FAVOR New R01 on Breast Pathology “BPATH” – A study of variability in interpretation of breast pathology, the impact of digital images and double reading 5-year multicenter study (R01 CA ) Using pathology cases from BCSC sites in NH, VT Random stratified sampling, with emphasis on atypia and DCIS Development of test sets and future CME

Beyond FAVOR Other Areas to Investigate Comparative effectiveness of new technology in the real community setting Medicare linkage data elements Diagnostic evaluation of breast abnormalities

FAVOR Summary Synergistic impact of collaborations with BCSC Collaboration with BCSC has allowed multiple cost effective R01’s with unique linkage to performance data FAVOR provided augmented data on individual radiologists and facilities and infrastructure to expand and support the AIM study Supportive of junior investigators Development of long term collaborations