Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine 6/2017

01-06-2017 | Original Research

Breast Density Notification Legislation and Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis: Early Evidence from the SEER Registry

Authors: Ilana Richman, MD, Steven M. Asch, MD MPH, Eran Bendavid, MD MS, Jay Bhattacharya, MD PhD, Douglas K. Owens, MD MS

Published in: Journal of General Internal Medicine | Issue 6/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Twenty-eight states have passed breast density notification laws, which require physicians to inform women of a finding of dense breasts on mammography.

Objective

To evaluate changes in breast cancer stage at diagnosis after enactment of breast density notification legislation.

Design

Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we examined changes in stage at diagnosis among women with breast cancer in Connecticut, the first state to enact legislation, compared to changes among women in control states. We used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER) registry, 2005–2013.

Participants

Women ages 40–74 with breast cancer.

Intervention

Breast density notification legislation, enacted in Connecticut in October of 2009.

Main Measure

Breast cancer stage at diagnosis.

Key Results

Our study included 466,930 women, 25,592 of whom lived in Connecticut. Legislation was associated with a 1.38-percentage-point (95 % CI 0.12 to 2.63) increase in the proportion of women in Connecticut versus control states who had localized invasive cancer at the time of diagnosis, and a 1.12-percentage-point (95 % CI −2.21 to −0.08) decline in the proportion of women with ductal carcinoma in situ at diagnosis. Breast density notification legislation was not associated with a change in the proportion of women in Connecticut versus control states with regional-stage (−0.09 percentage points, 95 % CI −1.01 to 1.02) or metastatic disease (−0.24, 95 % CI −0.75 to 0.28). County-level analyses and analyses limited to women younger than 50 found no statistically significant associations.

Limitations

Single intervention state, limited follow-up, potential confounding from unobserved trends.

Conclusions

Breast density notification legislation in Connecticut was associated with a small increase in the proportion of women diagnosed with localized invasive breast cancer in individual-level but not county-level analyses. Whether this finding reflects potentially beneficial early detection or potentially harmful overdiagnosis is not known. Legislation was not associated with changes in regional or metastatic disease.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V, et al. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106(10). doi:10.1093/jnci/dju255. Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V, et al. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014; 106(10). doi:10.​1093/​jnci/​dju255.
4.
go back to reference Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP, et al. Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2016. doi:10.7326/M15-1789. Melnikow J, Fenton JJ, Whitlock EP, et al. Supplemental screening for breast cancer in women with dense breasts: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2016. doi:10.​7326/​M15-1789.
6.
go back to reference Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Obdeijn IM, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;100(1):109–19. doi:10.1007/s10549-006-9230-z.CrossRefPubMed Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Obdeijn IM, et al. Factors affecting sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography and MRI in women with an inherited risk for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;100(1):109–19. doi:10.​1007/​s10549-006-9230-z.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers R-D, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(22):2304–10. doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.52.5386.CrossRefPubMed Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Strobel K, Schild HH, Hilgers R-D, Bieling HB. Abbreviated breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI): first postcontrast subtracted images and maximum-intensity projection-a novel approach to breast cancer screening with MRI. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(22):2304–10. doi:10.​1200/​JCO.​2013.​52.​5386.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Gartlehner G, Thaler K, Chapman A, et al. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD009632. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009632.pub2. Gartlehner G, Thaler K, Chapman A, et al. Mammography in combination with breast ultrasonography versus mammography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;4:CD009632. doi:10.​1002/​14651858.​CD009632.​pub2.
13.
go back to reference Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Griffin J, Daeges M, Humphrey L. Harms of breast cancer screening: systematic review to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):256. doi:10.7326/M15-0970.CrossRefPubMed Nelson HD, Pappas M, Cantor A, Griffin J, Daeges M, Humphrey L. Harms of breast cancer screening: systematic review to update the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):256. doi:10.​7326/​M15-0970.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Chu KC, Kramer BS, Smart CR. Analysis of the role of cancer prevention and control measures in reducing cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991;83(22):1636–43.CrossRefPubMed Chu KC, Kramer BS, Smart CR. Analysis of the role of cancer prevention and control measures in reducing cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991;83(22):1636–43.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Oliveira TMG, Elias J, Melo AF, et al. Evolving concepts in breast lobular neoplasia and invasive lobular carcinoma, and their impact on imaging methods. Insights Imag. 2014;5(2):183–94. doi:10.1007/s13244-014-0324-6.CrossRef Oliveira TMG, Elias J, Melo AF, et al. Evolving concepts in breast lobular neoplasia and invasive lobular carcinoma, and their impact on imaging methods. Insights Imag. 2014;5(2):183–94. doi:10.​1007/​s13244-014-0324-6.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J. 19(1):64–70. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12053. Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J. 19(1):64–70. doi: 10.​1111/​tbj.​12053.
Metadata
Title
Breast Density Notification Legislation and Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis: Early Evidence from the SEER Registry
Authors
Ilana Richman, MD
Steven M. Asch, MD MPH
Eran Bendavid, MD MS
Jay Bhattacharya, MD PhD
Douglas K. Owens, MD MS
Publication date
01-06-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of General Internal Medicine / Issue 6/2017
Print ISSN: 0884-8734
Electronic ISSN: 1525-1497
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-016-3904-y

Other articles of this Issue 6/2017

Journal of General Internal Medicine 6/2017 Go to the issue