Comparing the cost-effectiveness of the triple test score to traditional methods for evaluating palpable breast masses

Medical Care

Volumn 41, Issue 8, 2003, Pages 962-971

  Morris, Arden M ^a,c   Flowers, Christopher R ^a   Morris, Katherine T ^b   Schmidt, Waldemar A ^b   Pommier, Rodney F ^b   Vetto, John T ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast; Cancer; Cost effectiveness analysis; Economic; Outcomes; Palpable breast mass; Screening; Triple test

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; ECONOMICS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PALPATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

BIOPSY, NEEDLE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; PALPATION; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0042882768     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00005650-200308000-00009     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. SEER, Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Cancer Incidence Public-Use Database 1973-1998. National Cancer Institute. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/Publications/CSR1973_1998/overview/overview13.pdf. Accessed March 21, 2001.
2. Winchester DP, Sener S, Immerman S, et al. A systematic approach to the evaluation and management of breast masses. Cancer 1983;51:2535-2539.
3. Johansen C. A clinical study with special reference to diagnostic procedures. Acta Clin Scand 1975;451(suppl):1-70.
4. Hermansen C, Skovgaard Poulsen H, Jensen J, et al. Diagnostic reliability of combined physical examination, mammography, and fine-needle puncture ("triple-test") in breast tumors. A prospective study. Cancer 1987;60:1866-1871.
5. Layfield LJ. Can fine-needle aspiration replace open biopsy in the diagnosis of palpable breast lesions? [editorial] [see comments]. Am J Clin Pathol 1992;98:145-147.
6. Somers RG, Sandier GL, Kaplan MJ, et al. Palpable abnormalities of the breast not requiring excisional biopsy. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1992;175:325-328.
7. Steinberg JL, Trudeau ME, Ryder DE, et al. Combined fine-needle aspiration, physical examination and mammography in the diagnosis of palpable breast masses: their relation to outcome for women with primary breast cancer [published erratum appears in Can J Surg 1997;40:9]. Can J Surg 1996;39:302-311.
8. Vetto JT, Pommier RF, Schmidt WA, et al. Use of the "triple test" for palpable breast lesions yields high diagnostic accuracy and cost savings. Am J Surg 1995;169:519-522.
9. Vetto JT, Pommier RF, Schmidt WA, et al. Diagnosis of palpable breast lesions in younger women by the modified triple test is accurate and cost-effective. Arch Surg 1996;131:967-972; discussion 72-74.
10. Morris A, Pommier RF, Schmidt WA, et al. Accurate evaluation of palpable breast masses by the triple test score. Arch Surg 1998;133:930-934.
11. Morris KT, Pommier RF, Morris A, et al. Usefulness of the Triple Test Score for palpable breast masses. Arch Surg 2001;136:1008-1013.
12. Layfield LJ, Chrischilles EA, Cohen MB, et al. The palpable breast nodule. A cost-effectiveness analysis of alternate diagnostic approaches [see comments]. Cancer 1993;72:1642-1651.
13. Donegan WL. Evaluation of a palpable breast mass. N Engl J Med 1992;327:937-942.
14. Morrow M. The evaluation of common breast problems. Am Fam Physician 2000;61:2371-2378.
15. Scott S, Morrow M. Breast cancer: making the diagnosis. Surg Clin North Am 1999;79:991-1005.
16. Horobin JM, Matthew BM, Preece PE, et al. Effects of fine needle aspiration on subsequent mammograms. Br J Surg 1992;79:52-54.
17. Ciatto S, Cariaggi P, Bulgaresi P. The value of routine cytologic examination of breast cyst fluids. Acta Cytol 1987;31:301-304.
18. Hamed H, et al. Follow-up of patients with aspirated breast cysts is necessary. Arch Surg 1989;124:253-255.
19. van Dam PA, Van Goethem ML, Kersschot E, et al. Palpable solid breast masses: retrospective singleand multimodality evaluation of 201 lesions. Radiology 1988;166:435-439.
20. Boyd NF, Sutherland HJ, Fish EB, et al. Prospective evaluation of physical examination of the breast. Am J Surg 1981;142:331-334.
21. Grant CS, Goellner JR, Welch JS, et al. Fine-needle aspiration of the breast. Mayo Clin Proc 1986;61:377-381.
22. Layfield LJ, Glasgow BJ, Cramer H. Fine-needle aspiration in the management of breast masses. Pathol Annu 1989;24:23-62.
23. Medical Economics Company. Red Book. 104th ed. Drug Topics. Cardinale V, ed. Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics Company, Inc.; 2000: 950.
24. Elmore JG, Barton MB, Moceri VM, et al. Ten-year risk of false positive screening mammograms and clinical breast examinations [see comments]. N Engl J Med 1998;338:1089-1096.
25. HCFA Health Care Financing Administration. 2000. Bethesda, MD: Center for Medicare/Medicaid Services. Available at: http://www.hcfa.gov/stats/ pufiles.htm. Accessed October, 2001.
26. Shabot MM, Goldberg IM, Schick P, et al. Aspiration cytology is superior to Tru-Cut needle biopsy in establishing the diagnosis of clinically suspicious breast masses. Ann Surg 1982;196:122-126.
27. Barber GR, Miransky J, Brown AE, et al. Direct observations of surgical wound infections at a comprehensive cancer center. Arch Surg 1995;130:1042-1047.
28. Beatty JD, Robinson GV, Zaia JA, et al. A prospective analysis of nosocomial wound infection after mastectomy. Arch Surg 1983;118:1421-1424.
29. Beitler AL, Hurd TC, Edge SB. The evaluation of palpable breast masses: common pitfalls and management guidelines. Surg Oncol 1997;6:227-234.
30. Bertin ML, Crowe J, Gordon SM. Determinants of surgical site infection after breast surgery. Am J Infect Control 1998;26:61-65.
31. Harvey JA, Moran RE, DeAngelis GA. Technique and pitfalls of ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy of the breast. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000;21:362-374.
32. American Cancer Society. Breast cancer incidence rates by state, 1993-1997. Atlanta, GA: American Cancer Society. Available at: http://www3.cancer.org/asp/statistics/stt_global.asp. Accessed September 19, 2001.