|Grant Number:||3U01CA063736-05S1 Interpret this number|
|Primary Investigator:||Dignan, Mark|
|Organization:||Colorado State Dept/Pub Hlth & Environmt|
|Project Title:||Breast Cancer Surveillance Research in Colorado|
This proposal outlines the implementation and expansion of the Colorado BC screening surveillance system to include all facilities throughout the state that are involved in the provision of MM services to women. Specifically, this proposal requests support for activities to track the results of all MM completed for women in Colorado as well as conduct diagnostic and treatment follow-up for all cases with screen-detected abnormalities. This will include an estimated 300,000 MM and 45,000 women requiring diagnostic follow-up during the first year of the project. Funding currently received from the CDC will be used to continue the rescreening reminder component of CMAP as well as support tracking and follow-up for women who receive subsidized BC screening services from CPCP under the Colorado Women's Cancer Control Initiative. The proposed expansion will be guided by the phased addition of MC located in five specific regions in Colorado with the full expansion completed by Project Year 05. Proposed surveillance activities will include data collection for all completed MMs and characterization of screening results for all women. In addition, diagnostic follow-up will be conducted for all women with screen-detected abnormalities to determine the nature and results of diagnostic evaluation. Further follow-up will be conducted for women determined to have BC upon completion of diagnostic follow-up to ensure that comprehensive data are available concerning clinical characteristics of disease, treatment protocols, morbidity and mortality. Biannual matches of the full surveillance system database with all BC cases in the CCCR will be completed in order to identify interval and non-screen-detected BCs. These matches will also permit validation of data collected by the CPCP surveillance system concerning screen-detected BCs. In addition, the CPCP and CCCR will collaborate on the collection of pathobiology reports for all biopsy cases reported to the surveillance system, including both negative and positive biopsies. The CPCP will collaborate with a national Consortium to define and accomplish standardized data collection strategies and content as well as research priorities. In addition, the CPCP will work with an Advisory Board and investigators from a number of Colorado academic and health care to define and accomplish a BC research agenda for Colorado that draws upon specific components of the proposed screening surveillance system database.
Complementary approaches to assessing risk factors for interval breast cancer.
Authors: Lowery JT, Byers T, Hokanson JE, Kittelson J, Lewin J, Risendal B, Singh M, Mouchawar J
Source: Cancer Causes Control, 2011 Jan;22(1), p. 23-31.
EPub date: 2010 Oct 27.
When radiologists perform best: the learning curve in screening mammogram interpretation.
Authors: Miglioretti DL, Gard CC, Carney PA, Onega TL, Buist DS, Sickles EA, Kerlikowske K, Rosenberg RD, Yankaskas BC, Geller BM, Elmore JG
Source: Radiology, 2009 Dec;253(3), p. 632-40.
EPub date: 2009 Sep 29.
Decreased accuracy in interpretation of community-based screening mammography for women with multiple clinical risk factors.
Authors: Cook AJ, Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Sickles EA, Aiello Bowles EJ, Cutter GR, Carney PA
Source: J Clin Epidemiol, 2010 Apr;63(4), p. 441-51.
EPub date: 2009 Sep 9.
Predictors of radiologists' perceived risk of malpractice lawsuits in breast imaging.
Authors: Dick JF 3rd, Gallagher TH, Brenner RJ, Yi JP, Reisch LM, Abraham L, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA, Cutter GR, Elmore JG
Source: AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2009 Feb;192(2), p. 327-33.
Obesity, mammography use and accuracy, and advanced breast cancer risk.
Authors: Kerlikowske K, Walker R, Miglioretti DL, Desai A, Ballard-Barbash R, Buist DS
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2008 Dec 3;100(23), p. 1724-33.
EPub date: 2008 Nov 25.
Mammography facility characteristics associated with interpretive accuracy of screening mammography.
Authors: Taplin S, Abraham L, Barlow WE, Fenton JJ, Berns EA, Carney PA, Cutter GR, Sickles EA, Carl D, Elmore JG
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2008 Jun 18;100(12), p. 876-87.
EPub date: 2008 Jun 10.
Accuracy of short-interval follow-up mammograms by patient and radiologist characteristics.
Authors: Aiello Bowles EJ, Miglioretti DL, Sickles EA, Abraham L, Carney PA, Yankaskas BC, Elmore JG
Source: AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2008 May;190(5), p. 1200-8.
Joint modeling of sensitivity and specificity.
Authors: Puggioni G, Gelfand AE, Elmore JG
Source: Stat Med, 2008 May 10;27(10), p. 1745-61.
Radiologist characteristics associated with interpretive performance of diagnostic mammography.
Authors: Miglioretti DL, Smith-Bindman R, Abraham L, Brenner RJ, Carney PA, Bowles EJ, Buist DS, Elmore JG
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2007 Dec 19;99(24), p. 1854-63.
EPub date: 2007 Dec 11.
Evidence-based target recall rates for screening mammography.
Authors: Schell MJ, Yankaskas BC, Ballard-Barbash R, Qaqish BF, Barlow WE, Rosenberg RD, Smith-Bindman R
Source: Radiology, 2007 Jun;243(3), p. 681-9.
Reactions to uncertainty and the accuracy of diagnostic mammography.
Authors: Carney PA, Yi JP, Abraham LA, Miglioretti DL, Aiello EJ, Gerrity MS, Reisch L, Berns EA, Sickles EA, Elmore JG
Source: J Gen Intern Med, 2007 Feb;22(2), p. 234-41.
Marginal modeling of nonnested multilevel data using standard software.
Authors: Miglioretti DL, Heagerty PJ
Source: Am J Epidemiol, 2007 Feb 15;165(4), p. 453-63.
EPub date: 2006 Nov 22.
Does litigation influence medical practice? The influence of community radiologists' medical malpractice perceptions and experience on screening mammography.
Authors: Elmore JG, Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Cutter GR, D'Orsi CJ, Hendrick RE, Abraham LA, Fosse JS, Carney PA
Source: Radiology, 2005 Jul;236(1), p. 37-46.
Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists.
Authors: Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA, Taplin SH, D'Orsi C, Cutter G, Hendrick RE, Elmore JG
Source: J Natl Cancer Inst, 2004 Dec 15;96(24), p. 1840-50.
Radiologist uncertainty and the interpretation of screening.
Authors: Carney PA, Elmore JG, Abraham LA, Gerrity MS, Hendrick RE, Taplin SH, Barlow WE, Cutter GR, Poplack SP, D'Orsi CJ
Source: Med Decis Making, 2004 May-Jun;24(3), p. 255-64.
The sensitivity of Medicare billing claims data for monitoring mammography use by elderly women.
Authors: Mouchawar J, Byers T, Warren M, Schluter WW
Source: Med Care Res Rev, 2004 Mar;61(1), p. 116-27.