Audit system on Quality of breast cancer diagnosis and Treatment (QT): results of quality indicators on screen-detected lesions in Italy, 2011-2012

This annual survey, conducted by the Italian group for mammography screening (GISMa), collects individual data on diagnosis and treatment of about 50% of screen-detected, operated lesions in Italy. The 2011-2012 results show good overall quality and an improving trend over time. A number of critical issues have been identified, including waiting times (which have had a worsening trend over the years) and compliance with the recommendation of not performing frozen section examination on small lesions. Pre-operative diagnosis improved constantly over time, but there is still a large variation between Regions and programmes. For almost 90% of screen-detected invasive cancers a sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy was performed on the axilla, avoiding a large number of potentially harmful dissections. On the other hand, potential overuse of SLN dissection for ductal carcinoma in situ, although apparently starting to decline, deserves further investigation. The detailed results have been distributed, among other ways by means of a web-based data-warehouse, to regional and local screening programmes, in order to allow multidisciplinary discussion and identification of the appropriate solutions to any issues documented by the data. The problem of waiting times should be assigned priority. Specialist Breast Units with adequate case volume and enough resources would provide the best setting for making monitoring effective in producing quality improvements with shorter waiting times

Compliance with clinical practice guidelines for breast cancer treatment: a population-based study of quality-of-care indicators in Italy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>It has been documented that variations exist in breast cancer treatment despite wide dissemination of clinical practice guidelines. The aim of this population-based study was to evaluate the impact of regional guidelines (Piedmont guidelines, PGL) for breast cancer diagnosis and treatment on quality-of-care indicators in the Northwestern Italian region of Piedmont.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We included two samples of women aged 50–69 years with incident breast cancer treated in Piedmont before and after the introduction of PGL: 600 in 2002 (pre-PGL) and 621 in 2004 (post-PGL). Patients were randomly selected among all incident breast cancer cases identified through the hospital discharge records database. We extracted clinical data on breast cancer cases from medical charts and ascertained vital status through linkage with town offices. We assessed compliance with 14 quality-of-care indicators from PGL recommendations, before and after their introduction in clinical practice.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among patients with invasive lesions, 77.1% (N = 368) and 77.5% (N = 383) in the pre-PGL and post-PGL groups, respectively, received breast conservative surgery (BCS) as a first-line treatment. Following BCS, 87.7% received radiotherapy in 2002, compared to 87.9% in 2004. Of all patients at medium-to-high risk of distant metastasis, 65.5% (N = 268) and 63.6% (N = 252) received chemotherapy in 2002 and in 2004, respectively. Among the 117 patients with invasive lesions and negative estrogen receptor status in 2002, hormonal therapy was prescribed in 23 of them (19.6%). The incorrect prescription of hormonal therapy decreased to 10.8% (N = 10) among the 92 estrogen receptor-negative patients in 2004 (p < 0.01).</p> <p>Compliance with PGL recommendations was already high in the pre-PGL group, although some quality-of-care indicators did not reach the standard. In the pre/post analysis, 8 out of 14 quality-of-care indicators showed an improvement from 2002 to 2004, but only 4 out of 14 reached statistical significance. We did not find any change in the risk of mortality in the post-PGL <it>versus</it> the pre-PGL group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.94, 95%CI 0.56–1.56).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These results highlight the need to continue to improve breast cancer care and to measure adherence to PGL.</p

Comparing accuracy of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography or synthetic 2D mammography in breast cancer screening: baseline results of the MAITA RCT consortium

Aim: The analyses here reported aim to compare the screening performance of digital tomosynthesis (DBT) versus mammography (DM). Methods: MAITA is a consortium of four Italian trials, REtomo, Proteus, Impeto, and MAITA trial. The trials adopted a two-arm randomised design comparing DBT plus DM (REtomo and Proteus) or synthetic-2D (Impeto and MAITA trial) versus DM; multiple vendors were included. Women aged 45 to 69 years were individually randomised to one round of DBT or DM. Findings: From March 2014 to February 2022, 50,856 and 63,295 women were randomised to the DBT and DM arm, respectively. In the DBT arm, 6656 women were screened with DBT plus synthetic-2D. Recall was higher in the DBT arm (5·84% versus 4·96%), with differences between centres. With DBT, 0·8/1000 (95% CI 0·3 to 1·3) more women received surgical treatment for a benign lesion. The detection rate was 51% higher with DBT, ie. 2·6/1000 (95% CI 1·7 to 3·6) more cancers detected, with a similar relative increase for invasive cancers and ductal carcinoma in situ. The results were similar below and over the age of 50, at first and subsequent rounds, and with DBT plus DM and DBT plus synthetic-2D. No learning curve was appreciable. Detection of cancers &gt;= 20&nbsp;mm, with 2 or more positive lymph nodes, grade III, HER2-positive, or triple-negative was similar in the two arms. Interpretation: Results from MAITA confirm that DBT is superior to DM for the detection of cancers, with a possible increase in recall rate. DBT performance in screening should be assessed locally while waiting for long-term follow-up results on the impact of advanced cancer incidence