Improving breast cancer care through a regional quality collaborative

Embed Size (px)

Text of Improving breast cancer care through a regional quality collaborative

  • Improving breast cana regional quality co

    , Jane, M

    provtes aality

    ithin a regional breast cancer quality collaborative.

    IMPROVcenterDespitmentsthereEfforts

    n theout-stitu-

    ensivetionalandSM),ualityThis

    g andre at

    Accepte

    ReprintMichigaAnn Arb0039-6060/$ - see front matter 2011doi:10.1Methods. Established in 2006, the Michigan Breast Oncology Quality Initiative (MiBOQI) consists of18 hospitals collecting data on breast cancer care using the National Comprehensive Cancer CentersNetwork (NCCN) Oncology Outcomes Database Project platform to analyze and compare breast cancerpractices and outcomes amongst member institutions. Institutional review board approval is obtained ateach site. Data are submitted electronically to the NCCN and analyzed for concordance with practiceguidelines. Aggregate and blinded data are shared with project directors and institutions at collaborativemeetings, and ongoing practice patterns are observed for change. We analyzed variation in breast biopsytechnique for initial cancer diagnosis over time and between institutions. Diagnostic biopsies werecategorized as core needle, surgical excisional, surgical incisional, and other surgical biopsy.Results. Procedural data for 8,066 patients treated for breast cancer between November 1, 2006 andDecember 31, 2009 were analyzed. The mean patient age was 59.5 years (range, 25.490.0 years).Within MiBOQI, 21% of patients underwent surgical biopsy for initial diagnosis. The percentage ofpatients undergoing surgical biopsy ranged from 8% to 37%, and the majority of surgical biopsies wereclassified as excisional biopsies. Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ were more likely to undergosurgical biopsy compared to those with invasive cancer (30.4% vs 17.8%; P < .001). There was noassociation between biopsy type and patient age, race, or comorbidity. Data on biopsy technique wereshared with site project directors and a target surgical biopsy rate of

  • QI p

    ion cr

    s withtypes

    is witew etionbreae panom

    o evosise noays bed su

    ion c

    ion wion w

    reatmQI

    Surgery636 Breslin et alTable I. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for MiBO

    Inclus

    1. Newly diagnosed female breast cancer patientCommittee on Cancerdefined histologicnipple, and other)

    2. Age 18 years or older at the time of diagnos3. Patients must have been diagnosed with the n

    date of presentation to the MiBOQI institu4. Patients receive some or all of their primary

    chemotherapy, or hormonal therapy) at th5. Patients with a history of an invasive nonmela

    one of the following:a. Previous breast cancer episodes: There is ndiagnosed at least 90 days before the diagn

    b. Prior nonbreast cancer episodes: There arpresently and were diagnosed at least 90 dor with distant metastases, which were treatbeen no recurrence for at least 5 years

    Exclus

    1. Patients who present to the MiBOQI institut2. Patients who present to the MiBOQI institut

    diagnosed within 90 days of each other3. Patients receiving all primary breast cancer t4. Patients presenting to the participating MiBO

    transplantation or radiation therapyProject to the community setting. The foundationof the program is a network-based data collection,reporting, and analytic system that is designed todescribe patterns of care, monitor concordancewith NCCN guidelines, and evaluate outcomes. Inorder to promote not only quality monitoring butquality improvement, the program includes afeedback process whereby participating institu-tions, physicians, and guideline developmentpanels can compare data across the network andbetween institutions.

    The NCCN Breast Cancer Outcomes ProjectDatabase contains more than 300 data elementsincluding data on drug/biologic and diagnosticsuse and trends; specific treatment indications andsequencing; toxicity and reasons for discontinuation;complications and medical events; progression-freeand overall survival; comparative effectiveness andresource consumption; andpayor-specific data. Anal-yses of this dataset have led to multiple publicationsdescribing patterns of surgical and adjuvant therapyfor breast cancer1-4 and informed studies evaluatingquality measurement.5,6

    The diagnostic period is the patients first con-tact with breast cancer care providers and institu-tions. Timely and accurate diagnostic evaluationrequires close collaboration between surgeons,

    MiBOQI, Michigan Breast Oncology Quality Initiative; NCCN, National Comprearticipation

    iteria

    histology consistent with at least 1 of the American Joint(carcinoma not otherwise specified, ductal, lobular,

    h primary breast cancerpisode of breast cancer no more than 180 days before the

    st cancer treatment (cancer-directed surgery,rticipating institutionatous cancer diagnosis are eligible if the history includes

    idence of distant metastases or recurrence and wereof the current breast cancer episodedistant metastases and there is no evidence of diseaseefore the diagnosis of the current breast cancer episode;ccessfully resulting in a complete response and there has

    riteria

    ith or are diagnosed with cancer recurrenceith breast sarcoma or with simultaneous cancers

    ent outside of the participating MiBOQI institutioninstitution and receiving only bone marrow

    October 2011radiologists, and primary care providers. With lowcomplication rates and a long latency between di-agnostic procedures and outcomes such as survivaland local recurrence, quality measurement inbreast cancer diagnosis relies on process measures.One process measure that has received extensiveattention recently is diagnostic breast biopsy tech-nique. Core needle biopsy is preferred over opensurgical biopsy for diagnosing breast cancer, andThe National Accreditation Program for BreastCenters and the American Society of Breast Sur-geons require reporting of core needle biopsyrates for program participation.7,8 Previous studiesexamining trends in diagnostic breast biopsy indi-cate that core needle biopsy may be underused.9

    As a quality measure, diagnostic biopsy is measur-able and potentially amenable to change throughprovider education and feedback. We present ini-tial results from our analysis of institutional varia-tion in diagnostic breast biopsy technique withina regional breast cancer quality collaborative.

    METHODS

    Established in 2006,MiBOQI is a voluntary groupof hospitals andprivate practices that collect data onbreast cancer care using the NCCN Oncology Out-comes Database Project. Institutional review board

    hensive Cancer Centers Network.

  • breast cancer at MiBOQI institutions betweenNovember 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 wereincluded in this analysis. Patient and tumor char-acteristics are summarized in Table II. The meanpatient age was 59.5 years (range, 25.490.0 years).Twenty percent of patients had ductal carcinomain situ (DCIS), and 80% were diagnosed with inva-sive breast cancer.

    Over the 3-year study period, 21% of patientsunderwent surgical biopsy for initial diagnosis.The percentage of patients at each of the 14institutions undergoing surgical biopsy rangedfrom 8% to 37% (Fig 1, A), and the majority of sur-gical biopsies were classified as excisional biopsies(Fig 1, B). Over time, there was a statistically signif-icant (P < .0001) decrease in the percentage of pa-tients undergoing surgical biopsy across theMiBOQI collaborative (Fig 2). Although therewas a net decrease in surgical biopsy use at 11 cen-ters, there was actually an increase at 3 centers.

    Surgical biopsy use was significantly associatedwith a diagnosis of DCIS compared with invasivecancer (30.4% vs 17.8%; P < .001), and this findingwas fairly consistent across the collaborative. Pa-

    Surgery Breslin et al 637approval is obtained at each site. There are 42 acutecare (nonpsychiatric, nonrehabilitation) hospitalsor programs with sufficient breast cancer volumefor MiBOQI participation, and 18 centers currentlyparticipate. Data from the 14 participating hospitalswith sufficient patient numbers were analyzed forthis project. Each site designates a project directorand a research associate. Initially, potential partici-pating centers were invited to participate in Mi-BOQI by the coordinating center (UMCCC). As theprogram has matured, interested centers with suffi-cient case volume (100 breast cancer cases/year)may now apply for participation.

    Funding for MiBOQI is provided by Blue CrossBlue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM), which covers80% of the recommended full-time equivalentsalary for data collection and submission. Partici-pating sites are responsible for the remaining datacollection costs, travel to meetings, and projectdirector and administrative expenses. Data aresubmitted electronically to the NCCN and ana-lyzed for concordance with practice guidelines.Data are abstracted from clinical charts 4 monthsafter patient presentation and are available imme-diately to individual centers; however, an analysisof treatment-specific information requires addi-tional measurement time for events to occur (180days for chemotherapy and 270 days for hormoneand radiotherapy). Center-specific benchmarkeddata are provided to project directors on a quar-terly basis. Aggregate and blinded data are sharedwith project directors and institutions at regularcollaborative meetings 3 times per year, and ongo-ing practice patterns are observed for change.

    Criteria for inclusion in MiBOQI and the NCCNBreast Outcome Database are summarized in TableI. Only patients with at least 90 days of follow-upwere included in this analysis in order to capturethe diagnostic and surgical period. Data from 4 siteswere not included because they had recently joinedthe collaborative and had low case numbers.

    We analyzed breast biopsy technique for initialcancer diagnosis ov