Growth in the use of PET for six cancer types after coverage by medicare: Additive or replacement?

Journal of the American College of Radiology

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 33-41

  Hillner, Bruce E ^a   Tosteson, Anna N ^b   Song, Yunjie ^b   Tosteson, Tor D ^b   Onega, Tracy ^b   Goodman, David C ^a   Siegel, Barry A ^c  

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

^b DARTMOUTH INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH POLICY AND CLINICAL PRACTICE   (United States)

^c WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

bone scintigraphy; colorectal neoplasms; CT; elderly; esophageal neoplasms; head and neck neoplasms; lung neoplasms; lymphomas; Medicare; melanoma; MRI; PET; practice patterns; time trends

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; BONE SCINTISCANNING; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; COLORECTAL CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; ESOPHAGUS CANCER; HEAD AND NECK CANCER; HEALTH SERVICE; HUMAN; LUNG NON SMALL CELL CANCER; LYMPHOMA; MEDICARE; MELANOMA; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIMARY TUMOR;

EID: 84926231934     PISSN: 15461440     EISSN: 1558349X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2011.06.019     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN guidelines. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician-gls/f-guidelines.asp. Accessed December 27, 2010.
2. American College of Radiology. ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. Available at: http://www.acr.org/secondarymainmenucategories/quality-safety/app- criteria.aspx. Accessed January 2, 2011.
3. Podoloff DA, Ball DW, Ben-Josef E, et al. NCCN task force: clinical utility of PET in a variety of tumor types. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2009;7(suppl):S1-26.
4. Meropol NJ, Schrag D, Smith TJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guidance statement: the cost of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:3868-74.
5. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, Frangos AJ. The disproportionate effects of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 on radiologists' private office MRI and CT practices compared with those of other physicians. J Am Coll Radiol 2009;6:620-5.
6. Iglehart JK. The new era of medical imaging - progress and pitfalls. N Engl J Med 2006;354:2822-8.
7. Parker L, Levin DC, Frangos A, Rao VM. Geographic variation in the utilization of noninvasive diagnostic imaging: national Medicare data 1998-2007. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:1034-9.
8. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Sunshine JH. Recent shifts in place of service for noninvasive diagnostic imaging: have hospitals missed an opportunity? J Am Coll Radiol 2009;6:96-9.
9. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. PM Rev AB-01-54, expanded coverage of positron emission tomography (PET) scans and related claims processing changes. December 15, 2000. Available at: http://www.cms.gov/ transmittals/downloads/R136CIM.pdf. Accessed January 3, 2011.
10. Welch HG, Sharp SM, Gottlieb DJ, Skinner JS, Wennberg JE. Geographic variation in diagnosis frequency and risk of death among Medicare beneficiaries. JAMA 2011;305:1113-8.
11. Beebe M, Dalton J, Espronceda M, Evans D. CPT 2008 professional edition. Chicago, Ill: AMA Press; 2007.
12. Mitchell JM. Utilization trends for advanced imaging procedures: evidence from individuals with private insurance coverage in California. Med Care 2008;46:460-6.
13. Mitchell JM. The prevalence of physician self-referral arrangements after Stark II: evidence from advanced diagnostic imaging. Health Aff (Millwood) 2007;26:w415-24.
14. Smith-Bindman R, Miglioretti DL, Larson EB. Rising use of diagnostic medical imaging in a large integrated health system. Health Aff (Millwood) 2008;27:1491-502.
15. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Report to the Congress: Medicare payment policy. Available at: http://www.medpac.gov/publications/ congressional-reports/Mar05-EntireReport.pdf. Accessed December 30, 2010.
16. Hendee WR, Becker GJ, Borgstede JP, et al. Addressing overutilization in medical imaging. Radiology 2010;257:240-5.
17. Black WC, Welch HG. Advances in diagnostic imaging and overestimations of disease prevalence and the benefits of therapy. N Engl J Med 1993;328:1237-43. (Pubitemid 23115703)
18. Feinstein AR, Sosin DM, Wells CK. The Will Rogers phenomenon. N Engl J Med 1985;312:1604-8.
19. Rosselli Del Turco M, Palli D, Cariddi A, Ciatto S, Pacini P, Distante V. Intensive diagnostic follow-up after treatment of primary breast cancer. A randomized trial. National Research Council Project on Breast Cancer Follow-Up. JAMA 1994;271:1593-7. (Pubitemid 24155619)
20. US Government Accountability Office. Medicare: trends in fees, utilization, and expenditures for imaging services before and after implementation of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (GAO-08-1102R). Available at: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d081102r.pdf. Accessed January 2, 2011.
21. Rosenthal DI, Weilburg JB, Schultz T, et al. Radiology order entry with decision support: initial clinical experience. J Am Coll Radiol 2006;3: 799-806. (Pubitemid 44442007)
22. Blackmore CC, Mecklenburg RS, Kaplan GS. Effectiveness of clinical decision support in controlling inappropriate imaging. J Am Coll Radiol 2011;8:19-25.
23. Juweid ME, Cheson BD. Positron-emission tomography and assessment of cancer therapy. N Engl J Med 2006;354:496-507. (Pubitemid 43200300)
24. Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Hammill BG, et al. Changes in the use and costs of diagnostic imaging among Medicare beneficiaries with cancer 1999-2006. JAMA 2010;303:1625-31.
25. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Pub 100-03 Medicare national coverage determinations. Transmittal 31. Available at: http://www.cms. hhs.gov/Transmittals/downloads/R31NCD.pdf.
26. Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J, et al. Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med 2009;361:32-9.
27. 18F fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography staging of nonsmall- cell lung cancer: a Dutch cooperative randomized study. J Clin Oncol 2006;24:1800-6.
28. van Tinteren H, Hoekstra OS, Smit EF, et al. Effectiveness of positron emission tomography in the preoperative assessment of patients with suspected non-small-cell lung cancer: the PLUS multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:1388-93.
29. Viney RC, Boyer MJ, King MT, et al. Randomized controlled trial of the role of positron emission tomography in the management of stage I and II non-small-cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:2357-62. (Pubitemid 41115392)
30. Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI, et al. Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151:221-8.
31. Chalela JA, Kidwell CS, Nentwich LM, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in emergency assessment of patients with suspected acute stroke: a prospective comparison. Lancet 2007;369: 293-8. (Pubitemid 46136489)
32. van der Worp HB, van Gijn J. Clinical practice. Acute ischemic stroke. N Engl J Med 2007;357:572-9.
33. Morris PG, Lynch C, Feeney JN, et al. Integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography may render bone scintigraphy unnecessary to investigate suspected metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:3154-9.
34. Song JW, Oh Y-M, Shim T-S, Kim WS, Ryu J-S, Choi C-M. Efficacy comparison between 18F-FDG PET/CT and bone scintigraphy in detecting bony metastases of non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer 2009;65: 333-8.
35. Takenaka D, Ohno Y, Matsumoto K, et al. Detection of bone metastases in non-small cell lung cancer patients: comparison of whole-body diffusion- weighted imaging (DWI), whole-body MR imaging without and with DWI, whole-body FDG-PET/CT, and bone scintigraphy. J Magn Reson Imaging 2009;30:298-308.
36. 18F-FDG-PET/CT with (99m)Tc-MDP bone scintigraphy for the detection of bone metastases in cancer patients. Nucl Med Commun 2010;31: 597-603.
37. Liu T, Xu J-Y, Xu W, Bai Y-R, Yan W-L, Yang H-L. Fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and bone scintigraphy for the diagnosis of bone metastases in patients with lung cancer: which one is the best? A meta-analysis. Clin Oncol 2011;23: 350-8.
38. Levin DC, Rao VM, Parker L, Frangos AJ, Sunshine JH. Bending the curve: the recent marked slowdown in growth of noninvasive diagnostic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:W25-9.
39. Levin DC, Rao VM. The effect of self-referral on utilization of advanced diagnostic imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;196:848-52.
40. Blackmore CC, Medina LS. Evidence-based radiology and the ACR Appropriateness Criteria®. J Am Coll Radiol 2006;3:505-9. (Pubitemid 43946727)
41. Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991;11:88-94.
42. Metser U, You J, McSweeney S, Freeman M, Hendler A. Assessment of tumor recurrence in patients with colorectal cancer and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen level: FDG PET/CT versus contrast-enhanced 64-MDCT of the chest and abdomen. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:766-71.
43. 18F-FDG PET more accurate than standard diagnostic procedures in the detection of suspected recurrent melanoma? J Nucl Med 2004;45: 1323-7.
44. 18F fluorodeoxyglucose improves staging and patient management in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a multicenter prospective study. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:1190-5.
45. Scott AM, Gunawardana DH, Bartholomeusz D, Ramshaw JE, Lin P. PET changes management and improves prognostic stratification in patients with head and neck cancer: results of a multicenter prospective study. J Nucl Med 2008;49:1593-600.
46. Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the imaging subcommittee of international harmonization project in lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:571-8. (Pubitemid 350002965)