Implications of cancer staging uncertainties in radiation therapy decisions

Medical Decision Making

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 226-238

  Lee, Robert C ^a   Ekaette, Edidiong ^a   Kelly, Karie Lynn ^a   Craighead, Peter ^a   Newcomb, Chris ^a   Dunscombe, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Patient safety; Radiation; Risk analysis

Indexed keywords

ALANINE AMINOTRANSFERASE; ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE; ASPARTATE AMINOTRANSFERASE; BIOCHEMICAL MARKER; CA 15-3 ANTIGEN; CARCINOEMBRYONIC ANTIGEN; GAMMA GLUTAMYLTRANSFERASE; TISSUE POLYPEPTIDE ANTIGEN; TUMOR MARKER;

ARTICLE; BONE METASTASIS; BONE SCINTISCANNING; BREAST CANCER; CANADA; CANCER CENTER; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER STAGING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ECHOGRAPHY; HUMAN; LIVER FUNCTION TEST; LIVER METASTASIS; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PATIENT SAFETY; PROBABILITY; QUALITY OF LIFE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THORAX RADIOGRAPHY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; NEOPLASM METASTASIS; NEOPLASM STAGING; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 33646540726     PISSN: 0272989X     EISSN: 1552681X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0272989X06288684     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Canadian Association of Provincial Cancer Agencies. Standard for quality control at Canadian radiation treatment centres. Available from: www.medphys.ca/article.asp?id=165
2. Cox LA. Risk Analysis: Foundations, Models and Methods. New York: Kluwer Academic; 2002.
3. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Osborne CK. Diseases of the Breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000.
4. Fisher B, Bryant J, Dignam JJ, et al. Tamoxifen, radiation therapy, or both for prevention of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence after lumpectomy in women with invasive breast cancers of one centimeter or less [see comment]. J Clin Oncol. 1920;4141-9.
5. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer [see comment]. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233-41.
6. Forrest AP, Stewart HJ, Everington D, et al. Randomised controlled trial of conservation therapy for breast cancer: 6-year analysis of the Scottish trial. Scottish Cancer Trials Breast Group [see comment]. Lancet. 1996;348:708-13.
7. Donegan WL, Spratt JS. Cancer of the Breast. St. Louis (MO): Saunders-Elsevier Science; 2002.
8. Bruner JM, Inouye L, Fuller GN, Langford LA. Diagnostic discrepancies and their clinical impact in a neuropathology referral practice [see comment]. Cancer. 1997;79:796-803.
9. Coblentz TR, Mills SE, Theodorescu D. Impact of second opinion pathology in the definitive management of patients with bladder carcinoma. Cancer. 2001;91:1284-90.
10. Kronz JD, Westra WH, Epstein JI. Mandatory second opinion surgical pathology at a large referral hospital [see comment]. Cancer. 1999;86:2426-35.
11. Lind AC, Bewtra C, Healy JC, Sims KL. Prospective peer review in surgical pathology. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;104:560-6.
12. McBroom HM, Ramsay AD. The clinicopathological meeting: a means of auditing diagnostic performance. Am J Surg Pathol. 1993;17:75-80.
13. Nakhleh RE, Zarbo RJ. Amended reports in surgical pathology and implications for diagnostic error detection and avoidance: a College of American Pathologists Q-probes study of 1,667,547 accessioned cases in 359 laboratories [see comment]. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1998;122:303-9.
14. Staradub VL, Messenger KA, Hao N, Wiley EL, Morrow M. Changes in breast cancer therapy because of pathology second opinions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:982-7.
15. Westra WH, Kronz JD, Eisele DW. The impact of second opinion surgical pathology on the practice of head and neck surgery: a decade experience at a large referral hospital. Head Neck. 2002;24:684-93.
16. McGinnis KS, Lessin SR, Elder DE, et al. Pathology review of cases presenting to a multidisciplinary pigmented lesion clinic [see comment]. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138:617-21.
17. Santoso JT, Coleman RL, Voet RL, Bernstein SG, Lifshitz S, Miller D. Pathology slide review in gynecologic oncology. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91(5, Pt 1):730-4.
18. Whitehead ME, Grieve JH, Payne MJ, Ross MS. Quality assurance of histopathologic diagnosis in the British Army: role of the Army Histopathology Registry in completed case review. J Royal Army Medical Corps. 1986;132:71-5.
19. Law AM, Kelton WD. Simulation Modeling and Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000.
20. Nease RF Jr, Owens DK. Use of influence diagrams to structure medical decisions. Med Decis Making. 1997;17:263-75.
21. Owens DK, Shachter RD, Nease RF Jr. Representation and analysis of medical decision problems with influence diagrams. Med Decis Making. 1997;17:241-62.
22. Helton JC, Davis FJ. Illustration of sampling-based methods for uncertainty and sensitivity analysis. Risk Anal. 2002;22:591-622.
23. Morgan MG, Henrion M. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 1990.
24. Lacic M, Bokulic T, Lukac J, Kovacic K, Baum RP, Kusic Z. Bone marrow immunoscintigraphy for the detection of skeletal metastases in patients with breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 1999;20:135-43.
25. Ohta M, Tokuda Y, Suzuki Y, et al. Whole body PET for the evaluation of bony metastases in patients with breast cancer: comparison with 99Tcm-MDP bone scintigraphy. Nucl Med Commun. 2001;22:875-9.
26. Prior JO, Barghouth G, Delaloye JF, Leyvraz S, Bischof DA. The value of bone marrow scintigraphy using 99mTc monoclonal antigranulocyte antibodies in complement to bone scintigraphy in detecting bone metastases from primary breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2003;24:29-36.
27. Ravaioli A, Pasini G, Polselli A, et al. Staging of breast cancer: new recommended standard procedure. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;72:53-60.
28. Spanu A, Farris A, Schillaci O, et al. The usefulness of 99mTc tetrofosmin scintigraphy in patients with breast cancer recurrences. Nucl Med Commun. 2003;24:145-54.
29. Alderson PO, Adams DF, McNeil BJ, et al. Computed tomography, ultrasound, and scintigraphy of the liver in patients with colon or breast carcinoma: a prospective comparison. Radiology. 1983;149:225-30.
30. Bruneton JN, Raffaelli C, Padovani B, Maestro C, Chevallier P, Mourou MY. Etiologic diagnosis of hepatic lesions in cancer patients: value of ultrasound and liver function tests. Clin Imaging. 1997;21:366-71.
31. de Brauw LM, van de Velde CJ, Pauwels EK, et al. Hepatic metastases: comparative study of diagnostic ultrasound, CT, nuclear scintigraphy and laboratory tests. Neth J Surg. 1991;43:92-4.
32. de Brauw LM, van de Velde CJ, Pauwels EK, et al. Prospective comparative study of ultrasound, CT-scan, scintigraphy and laboratory tests to detect hepatic metastases. J Nucl Biol Med. 1991;35:131-4.
33. McGarrity TJ, Samuels T, Wilson FA. An analysis of imaging studies and liver function tests to detect hepatic neoplasia. Digestive Dis Sci. 1987;32:1113-7.
34. Kim NK, Yasmineh WG, Freier EF, Goldman AI, Theologides A. Value of alkaline phosphatase, 5′-nucleotidase, gamma-glutamyltraiisferase, and glutamate dehydrogenase activity measurements (single and combined) in serum in diagnosis of metastasis to the liver. Clin Chem. 1977;23:2034-8.
35. Waalkes TP, Abeloff MD, Ettinger DS, Mrochek JE, Bostick WD. Biological markers as an aid in the clinical management of patients with liver metastases. J Surg Oncol. 1982;20:83-94.
36. Hou MF, Chen YL, Tseng TF, et al. Evaluation of serum CA27.29, CA15-3 and CEA in patients with breast cancer. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 1999;15:520-8.
37. Lee RC, Wright WE. Development of human exposure factor distributions using maximum-entropy inference. J Expos Anal Environ Epi. 1994;4:329-41.
38. Weinstein MC, Fineberg HV, Elstein AS, et al. Clinical Decision Analysis. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders; 1980.
39. Nicolini A, Ferrari P, Sagripanti A, Carpi A. The role of tumour markers in predicting skeletal metastases in breast cancer patients with equivocal bone scintigraphy. Br J Cancer. 1999;79:1443-7.
40. Nicolini A, Carpi A, Ferrari P, et al. The role of tumour markers in improving the accuracy of conventional chest X-ray and liver echography in the post-operative detection of thoracic and liver metastases from breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2000;83:1412-7.
41. Keeney RL. Value-Focused Thinking: A Path to Creative Decisionmaking. Boston: Harvard University Press; 1992.
42. Brandeau ML, Sainfort F, Pierskalla W. Operations Research and Health Care: A Handbook of Methods and Applications. New York: Kluwer Academic; 2004.
43. Engelhard K, Hollenbach HP, Wohlfart K, von Imhoff E, Fellner FA. Comparison of whole-body MRI with automatic moving table technique and bone scintigraphy for screening for bone metastases in patients with breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:99-105.
44. Gallowitsch HJ, Kresnik E, Gasser J, et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in the diagnosis of tumor recurrence and metastases in the follow-up of patients with breast carcinoma: a comparison to conventional imaging. Invest Radiol. 2003;38:250-6.
45. Schattevoet WH, Corstens FH, Beex LA, Rosenbusch GJ. [Reliability of sonography in diagnosing liver metastases in breast and bronchial cancer: a retrospective comparison of physical examination, laboratory tests and liver scintigraphy]. Ultraschall Med. 1986;7:293-9.
46. Tempero MA, Williams CA, Anderson JC. The value of hepatic ultrasound and biochemical liver tests in screening for liver metastases. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4:1074-8.
47. Ciatto S, Pacini P, Bravetti P, et al. Staging breast cancer: screening for occult metastases. Tumori. 1985;71:339-44.
48. Kokko R, Hakama M, Holli K. Role of chest X-ray in diagnosis of the first breast cancer relapse: a randomized trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003;81:33-9.
49. Karmen C, Mayne PD, Foo AY, Parbhoo S, Rosalki SB. Measurement of biliary alkaline phosphatase by mini-column chromatography and by electrophoresis and its application to the detection of liver metastases in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Pathol. 1984;37:212-7.
50. Ritzke C, Stieber P, Untch M, Nagel D, Eiermann W, Fateh-Moghadam A. Alkaline phosphatase isoenzymes in detection and follow up of breast cancer metastases. Anticancer Res. 1998;18:1243-9.
51. Reale MG, Santini D, Marchei GG, et al. Skeletal alkaline phosphatase as a serum marker of bone metastases in the follow-up of patients with breast cancer. Int J Biol Markers. 1995;10:42-6.
52. D'Alessandro R, Roselli M, Ferroni P, et al. Serum tissue polypeptide specific antigen (TPS): a complementary tumor marker to CA 15-3 in the management of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2001;68:9-19.
53. Guadagni F, Ferroni P, Carlini S, et al. A re-evaluation of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) as a serum marker for breast cancer: a prospective longitudinal study. Clin Cancer Res. 2001;7:2357-62.
54. Lauro S, Trasatti L, Bordin F, et al. Comparison of CEA, MCA, CA 15-3 and CA 27-29 in follow-up and monitoring therapeutic response in breast cancer patients. Anticancer Res. 1999;19:3511-5.
55. Rocio Estrada-Sanchez G, Mireles EM, Valverde CN. [Reliability of CA 15-3 in the follow up of female patients with breast carcinoma and bone metastases]. Rev Invest Clin. 2003;55:412-8.
56. Torres M, Pacheco C, Valverde A, et al. CA 549 and SP2 in postoperative breast cancer patients: comparison with CA 15.3, CEA and TPA. Int J Biol Markers. 1995;10:94-9.
57. Vizcarra E, Lluch A, Cibrian R, et al. Value of CA 15.3 in breast cancer and comparison with CEA and TPA: a study of specificity in disease-free follow-up patients and sensitivity in patients at diagnosis of the first metastasis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1996;37:209-16.
58. Wojtacki J, Kruszewski WJ, Sliwinska M, et al. [Elevation of serum Ca 15-3 antigen: an early indicator of distant metastasis from breast cancer. Retrospective analysis of 733 cases]. Przegl Lek. 2001;58:498-503.