Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2017

01-05-2017 | Epidemiology

Oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation in breast cancer multigene testing

Authors: Tracy A. Lieu, G. Thomas Ray, Stephanie R. Prausnitz, Laurel A. Habel, Stacey Alexeeff, Yan Li, Scott D. Ramsey, Charles E. Phelps, Neetu Chawla, Suzanne C. O’Neill, Jeanne S. Mandelblatt

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Multigene testing for breast cancer recurrence risk became available in 2007, yet many eligible patients remain untested. This study evaluated variation in testing rates, and oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation, in a setting without financial influences on testing.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic data and oncologist surveys within Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care system. Analyses included all 2974 test eligible patients from 2013 to 2015, 113 oncologists, and 15 practice groups. Receipt of multigene testing was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models.

Results

Overall, 39% of eligible patients had multigene testing, but rates varied widely among practice groups, ranging from 24 to 48% after case mix adjustment. This 24% difference among practices was greater than the variation associated with most patient characteristics, including comorbidities and race/ethnicity, and similar to that associated with tumor size. Practice group and oncologist factors were statistically significant contributors to the variation in testing after adjusting for patient factors. Patients were more likely to be tested if they had a female oncologist (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21–2.12) or were in a practice whose chief had a high testing rate (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12–1.29 per 10% increase in the percent tested).

Conclusions

Oncologist and leadership practices play a key role in the variation in genomic test use for cancer recurrence risk even in a healthcare system without financial barriers to testing and could be a leverage point for implementing desired practice changes for new genomic advances.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(33):5287–5312CrossRefPubMed Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R et al (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(33):5287–5312CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Carlson RW, Allred DC, Anderson BO et al (2011) Invasive breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 9(2):136–222PubMed Carlson RW, Allred DC, Anderson BO et al (2011) Invasive breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 9(2):136–222PubMed
3.
go back to reference Enewold L, Geiger AM, Zujewski J, Harlan LC (2015) Oncotype Dx assay and breast cancer in the United States: usage and concordance with chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 151(1):149–156CrossRefPubMed Enewold L, Geiger AM, Zujewski J, Harlan LC (2015) Oncotype Dx assay and breast cancer in the United States: usage and concordance with chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat 151(1):149–156CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Lyman GH, Curtis LH (2015) Association between use of the 21-gene recurrence score assay and receipt of chemotherapy among medicare beneficiaries with early-stage breast cancer, 2005-2009. JAMA Oncol. 1(8):1098–1109CrossRefPubMed Dinan MA, Mi X, Reed SD, Lyman GH, Curtis LH (2015) Association between use of the 21-gene recurrence score assay and receipt of chemotherapy among medicare beneficiaries with early-stage breast cancer, 2005-2009. JAMA Oncol. 1(8):1098–1109CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Ray GT, Mandelblatt J, Habel LA et al (2016) Breast cancer multigene testing trends and impact on chemotherapy use. Am J Manag Care. 22(5):e153–160PubMedPubMedCentral Ray GT, Mandelblatt J, Habel LA et al (2016) Breast cancer multigene testing trends and impact on chemotherapy use. Am J Manag Care. 22(5):e153–160PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Jasem J, Amini A, Rabinovitch R et al (2016) 21-gene recurrence score assay as a predictor of adjuvant chemotherapy administration for early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of use, therapeutic implications, and disparity profile. J Clin Oncol 34(17):1995–2002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jasem J, Amini A, Rabinovitch R et al (2016) 21-gene recurrence score assay as a predictor of adjuvant chemotherapy administration for early-stage breast cancer: an analysis of use, therapeutic implications, and disparity profile. J Clin Oncol 34(17):1995–2002CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Epstein AJ, Wong YN, Mitra N et al (2015) Adjuvant chemotherapy use and health care costs after introduction of genomic testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 33(36):4259–4267CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Epstein AJ, Wong YN, Mitra N et al (2015) Adjuvant chemotherapy use and health care costs after introduction of genomic testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 33(36):4259–4267CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Hassett MJ, Silver SM, Hughes ME et al (2012) Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30(18):2218–2226CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hassett MJ, Silver SM, Hughes ME et al (2012) Adoption of gene expression profile testing and association with use of chemotherapy among women with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30(18):2218–2226CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
11.
go back to reference Gordon NP (2015) Similarity of the adult Kaiser Permanente membership in Northern California to the insured and general population in Northern California: Statistics from the 2011 California Health Interview Survey report Gordon NP (2015) Similarity of the adult Kaiser Permanente membership in Northern California to the insured and general population in Northern California: Statistics from the 2011 California Health Interview Survey report
12.
go back to reference Oehrli MD, Quesenberry CP (2015) Northern California Cancer Registry: 2015 Annual Report on Trends, Incidence, and Outcomes. Kaiser Permanente, Oakland Oehrli MD, Quesenberry CP (2015) Northern California Cancer Registry: 2015 Annual Report on Trends, Incidence, and Outcomes. Kaiser Permanente, Oakland
13.
go back to reference Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45(6):613–619CrossRefPubMed Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45(6):613–619CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Fitzmaurice GM, Laird NM, Ware JH (2012) Generalized linear mixed effects models. Applied longitudinal analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 395–439 Fitzmaurice GM, Laird NM, Ware JH (2012) Generalized linear mixed effects models. Applied longitudinal analysis, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester, pp 395–439
17.
go back to reference Mickey RM, Greenland S (1989) The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol 129(1):125–137CrossRefPubMed Mickey RM, Greenland S (1989) The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol 129(1):125–137CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Tsugawa Y, Jena AB, Figueroa JF, Orav EJ, Blumenthal DM, Jha AK (2016) Comparison of hospital mortality and readmission rates for medicare patients treated by male vs female physicians. JAMA Intern Med 177(2):206–213CrossRef Tsugawa Y, Jena AB, Figueroa JF, Orav EJ, Blumenthal DM, Jha AK (2016) Comparison of hospital mortality and readmission rates for medicare patients treated by male vs female physicians. JAMA Intern Med 177(2):206–213CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Lurie N, Slater J, McGovern P, Ekstrum J, Quam L, Margolis K (1993) Preventive care for women. Does the sex of the physician matter? N Engl J Med 329(7):478–482CrossRefPubMed Lurie N, Slater J, McGovern P, Ekstrum J, Quam L, Margolis K (1993) Preventive care for women. Does the sex of the physician matter? N Engl J Med 329(7):478–482CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Franks P, Clancy CM (1993) Physician gender bias in clinical decisionmaking: screening for cancer in primary care. Med Care 31(3):213–218CrossRefPubMed Franks P, Clancy CM (1993) Physician gender bias in clinical decisionmaking: screening for cancer in primary care. Med Care 31(3):213–218CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Kreuter MW, Strecher VJ, Harris R, Kobrin SC, Skinner CS (1995) Are patients of women physicians screened more aggressively? A prospective study of physician gender and screening. J Gen Intern Med 10(3):119–125CrossRefPubMed Kreuter MW, Strecher VJ, Harris R, Kobrin SC, Skinner CS (1995) Are patients of women physicians screened more aggressively? A prospective study of physician gender and screening. J Gen Intern Med 10(3):119–125CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Bertakis KD, Helms LJ, Callahan EJ, Azari R, Robbins JA (1995) The influence of gender on physician practice style. Med Care 33(4):407–416CrossRefPubMed Bertakis KD, Helms LJ, Callahan EJ, Azari R, Robbins JA (1995) The influence of gender on physician practice style. Med Care 33(4):407–416CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Lurie N, Margolis KL, McGovern PG, Mink PJ, Slater JS (1997) Why do patients of female physicians have higher rates of breast and cervical cancer screening? J Gen Intern Med 12(1):34–43CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lurie N, Margolis KL, McGovern PG, Mink PJ, Slater JS (1997) Why do patients of female physicians have higher rates of breast and cervical cancer screening? J Gen Intern Med 12(1):34–43CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Benko C, Pelster B (2013) How women decide. Harv Bus Rev 91:78–84 Benko C, Pelster B (2013) How women decide. Harv Bus Rev 91:78–84
25.
go back to reference Roberts MC, Dusetzina SB (2015) Use and costs for tumor gene expression profiling panels in the management of breast cancer from 2006 to 2012: implications for genomic test adoption among private payers. J Oncol Pract. 11(4):273–277CrossRefPubMed Roberts MC, Dusetzina SB (2015) Use and costs for tumor gene expression profiling panels in the management of breast cancer from 2006 to 2012: implications for genomic test adoption among private payers. J Oncol Pract. 11(4):273–277CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Chen C, Dhanda R, Tseng WY, Forsyth M, Patt DA (2013) Evaluating use characteristics for the oncotype Dx 21-gene recurrence score and concordance with chemotherapy use in early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract. 9(4):182–187CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chen C, Dhanda R, Tseng WY, Forsyth M, Patt DA (2013) Evaluating use characteristics for the oncotype Dx 21-gene recurrence score and concordance with chemotherapy use in early-stage breast cancer. J Oncol Pract. 9(4):182–187CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Afghahi A, Mathur M, Thompson CA et al (2016) Use of gene expression profiling and chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer: a study of linked electronic medical records, cancer registry data, and genomic data across two health care systems. J Oncol Pract. 12(6):e697–709CrossRefPubMed Afghahi A, Mathur M, Thompson CA et al (2016) Use of gene expression profiling and chemotherapy in early-stage breast cancer: a study of linked electronic medical records, cancer registry data, and genomic data across two health care systems. J Oncol Pract. 12(6):e697–709CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation in breast cancer multigene testing
Authors
Tracy A. Lieu
G. Thomas Ray
Stephanie R. Prausnitz
Laurel A. Habel
Stacey Alexeeff
Yan Li
Scott D. Ramsey
Charles E. Phelps
Neetu Chawla
Suzanne C. O’Neill
Jeanne S. Mandelblatt
Publication date
01-05-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4158-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 1/2017 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine