Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Breast cancer surveillance — a cost-effective strategy

  • Cost analysis of diagnosis and treatment in breast cancer — Mini-symposium
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The effectiveness of a surveillance program for breast cancer recurrence in extending survival is predicated on two assumptions: 1) most recurrences are detected at an early stage at surveillance visits; and 2) the early treatment of recurrence offers a better chance of cure or longer survival. However, the data suggest that neither of these two assumptions is correct, and that postoperative follow-up of patients with breast cancer is expensive and does not significantly extend survival.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Zwaveling A, Albers GMR, Felthuis W, et al: An evaluation of routine follow up for detection of breast cancer recurrences. J Surg Oncol 34:194–197, 1987

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pandya KJ, McFadden ET, Kalish LA, et al: A retrospective study of earliest indicators of recurrence in Patients on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trials for breast cancer. Cancer 55:202–205, 1985

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scanlon EF, Ovieda MA, Cunningham MP, et al: Preoperative and follow up procedures on patients with breast cancer. Cancer 46:977–979, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  4. Broyn T, Froyen J: Evaluation of routine follow up after surgery for breast carcinoma. Acta Chir Scand 148:401–404, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  5. Winchester DP, Sener SF, Khanderkar JD: Symptomatology as an indicator of recurrent or metastatic breast cancer. Cancer 43:956–960, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baker RR, Holmes ER, Anderson PO, et al: An evaluation of bone scans as screening procedures for occult metastases in primary breast cancer. Ann Surg 186: 363, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burkett FE, Scanlon EF, Garces RM, et al: The value of bone scans in the management of patients with carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 149: 523–525, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  8. McNeil B, Pace PD, Gray E, et al: Pre-operative and follow up bone scans in patients with primary carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 147:745–748, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  9. O'Connell MJ, Wahner HW, Ahmann DL, et al. Value of preoperative radionucleotide bone scans in suspected primary breast cancer. Mayo Clinic Proc 53:221, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  10. Wickerham L, Fisher B, Cronin W, et al: The efficacy of bone scanning in the follow-up of patients with operable breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 4:303–307, 1984

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pedrazzini A, Gelbes R, Isley M, et al: First repeated bone scan in the observation of patients with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 4:389–394, 1986

    Google Scholar 

  12. Perez D, Milan J, Powles T, et al: Detection of breast carcinoma metastases in bone: Relative merits of x-rays and skeletal scintigraphy. Lancet ii:613–616, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rossing N, Munck O, Nielsen S, et al: What do early bone scans tell about breast cancer patients? Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 18:629–636, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  14. Corcoran RJ, Thrall JH, Kyle RW, et al: Solitary abnormalities in bone scans of patients with extraosseous malignancies. Radiology 121:663–667, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hartunian N, Smart C, Thompson M: The incidence and economic costs of cancer, motor vehicle injuries, coronary heart disease, and stroke: A comparative analysis. Am J Publ Health 70:1249–1260, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hodgson TA, Meiners MR: Cost-of-illness methodology: A guide to current practice and procedures. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 60:429–462, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  17. Warner KE, Luce BR: Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis in health care: Principles, practice, and potential. Health Admin Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Russell LB: Is prevention better than cure? The Brookings Institution, Washington DC, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  19. American Cancer Society: Cancer Facts and Figures. New York A.C.S., Inc., 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Holland JF: Karnofsky Memorial Lecture: Breaking the cure barrier. J Clin Oncol 1:74–90, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  21. Legha SS, Buzdar AU, Smith TL, et al: Complete remissions in metastatic breast cancer treated with combination drug therapy. Ann Int Med 91:847–852, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  22. Blumenschein GR, Buzdar AU, Yap HY, et al: Seven year follow up of Stage IV patients entering complete remissions from FAC. 3rd E.O.R.T.C. Working Conference IX, 43, 1983

    Google Scholar 

  23. Lippman ME, Lichter AS, Danforth DN: Diagnosis and management of breast cancer. WB Saunders Co, 1988, pp 375-406

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, and Department of Internal Medicine, University of South Florida College of Medicine, 12901 N. 30th St., 33612, Tampa, FL, USA

    David V. Schapira M.B.Ch.B., F.R.C.P.(C)

Authors
  1. David V. Schapira M.B.Ch.B., F.R.C.P.(C)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This minisymposium was presented December 8, 1992, at the annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, and was sponsored by educational grants from Amgen and from Bristol-Myers Oncology Division.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schapira, D.V. Breast cancer surveillance — a cost-effective strategy. Breast Cancer Res Tr 25, 107–111 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00662135

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00662135

Key words

Search

Navigation