Decision analysis: MIBI imaging of nonpalpable breast abnormalities

Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Volumn 38, Issue 11, 1997, Pages 1772-1778

  Hillner, Bruce E ^a,b  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasm; Computer simulation; Cost effectiveness analysis; Decision modeling; Diagnostic imaging

Indexed keywords

METHOXY ISOBUTYL ISONITRILE TECHNETIUM TC 99M;

ADULT; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STEREOTAXIC SURGERY;

BIOPSY; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; RADIOPHARMACEUTICALS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STEREOTAXIC TECHNIQUES; TECHNETIUM TC 99M SESTAMIBI;

EID: 0030692754     PISSN: 01615505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Veronesi U, Willett W. Breast cancer. N Engl J Med 1992;327:319-328.
2. Eddy DM. Screening for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 1989;111:389-399.
3. Cyrlak D. Induced costs of low-cost screening mammography. Radiology 1988;168: 661-663.
4. Kotz D. Scintimammography: magic bullet or false promise? J Nucl Med 1995;36: 15N-18N,20N.
5. Khalkhali I, Mena I, Jouanne E, et al. Prone scintimammography in patients with suspicion of carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg 1994;178:491-497.
6. Khalkhali I, Cutrone JA, Mena I, et al. Technetium-99m-sestamibi scintimammography of breast lesions: clinical and pathological fol low-up. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1784-1789.
7. Taillefer R, Robidoux A, Lambert R, Turpin S, Laperriere J. Technetium-99m-sestamibi prone scintimammography to detect primary breast cancer and axillary lymph node involvement. J Nucl Med 1995;36:1758-1765.
8. 99mTc-sestamibi breast imaging in breast cancer detection [Abstract]. J Nucl Med 1996;37:74P.
9. Hillner BE, Smith TJ, Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of autologous bone marrow transplantation in metastatic breast cancer. Estimates using decision analysis while awaiting clinical trial results. J Am Med Assoc 1992;267:2055-2061.
10. Detsky AS. Using economic analysis to determine the resource consequences of choices made in planning clinical trials. J Chronic Dis 1985;38:753-765.
11. Hillner BE, Bear HD, Fajardo LL. Estimating the cost-effectiveness of stereotaxic biopsy for non-palpable breast abnormalities: a decision analysis model. Acad Radiol 1996;3:351-360.
12. Hollenberg, JP. SMLTREE version 3.0. Roslyn, NY: 1989.
13. Wilkinson GS, Edgerton F, Wallace HJ, Reese P, Patterson J, Priore R. Delay, stage of disease and survival from breast cancer. J Chronic Dis 1979;32:365-373.
14. Elwood JM, Moorehead WP. Delay in diagnosis and long-term survival in breast cancer. Br Med J 1980:1291-1294.
15. Dershaw DD, Morris EA, Liberman L, Abramson AF. Nondiagnostic stereotaxic core breast biopsy: results of rebiopsy. Radiology 1996;198:323-325.
16. Knutzen AM, Gisvold JJ. Likelihood of malignant disease for various categories of mammographically detected, nonpalpable breast lesions. Mayo Clin Proc 1993;68: 454-460.
17. Kopans, DB. In: Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Hellman S, eds. Diseases of the breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott Raven; 1996:71-86.
18. Meyer JE, Eberlein TJ, Stomper PC, Sonnenfeld MR. Biopsy of occult breast lesions. Analysis of 1261 abnormalities. J Am Med Assoc 1990;263:2341-2343.
19. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system, 2nd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 1995.
20. Parker SH, Burbank F, Jackman RJ, et al. Percutaneous large-core breast biopsy: a multi-institutional study. Radiology 1994;193:359-364.
21. Gisvold JJ, Goellner JR, Grant CS, et al. Breast biopsy: a comparative study of stereotaxically guided core and excisional techniques. Am J Roentgenol 1994;162: 815-820.
22. Caines JS, McPhee MD, Konok GP, Wright BA. Stereotaxic needle core biopsy of breast lesions using a regular mammographic table with an adaptable stereotaxic device. Am J Roentgenol 1994;163:317-321.
23. Morrow M. When can stereotactic core biopsy replace excisional biopsy? A clinical perspective. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1995;36:1-9.
24. Specificity of screening in United Kingdom trial of early detection of breast cancer. Br Med J 1992;304:346-349.
25. Sickles EA. Quality assurance. How to audit your own mammography practice. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:265-275.
26. Detsky AS, Naglie IG. A clinician's guide to cost-effectiveness analysis. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:147-154.
27. Sickles EA. Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3184 consecutive cases. Radiology 1991;179:463-468.
28. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994;331:1493-1499.
29. Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of cancer treatment: rational allocation of resources based on decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:1460-1474.
30. Kupersmith J, Holmes-Rovner M, Hogan A, Rovner D, Gardiner J. Cost-effectiveness analysis in heart disease. Part III. Ischemia, congestive heart failure and arrhythmias. Prog Cardiovasc Dis 1995;37:307-346.
31. Eddy DM. Screening for cervical cancer. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:214-226.
32. Mitnick JS, Vazquez MF, Plesser KP, Roses DF. Breast cancer malpractice litigation in New York State. Radiology 1993;189:673-676.
33. Brown ML, Kessler LG. The use of gene tests to detect hereditary predisposition to cancer: economic considerations. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1131-1136.
34. Morrow M. Management of nonpalpable breast lesions. In: DeVita, VT, Hellman S, Rosenberg SA, eds. Cancer: principles and practice of oncology. Cedar Knolls, NJ: Lippincott Raven Healthcare; 1990:1-11.