Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.0950 on January 21 2009

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Snyder, C. F. Articles by Earle, C. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Snyder, C. F. Articles by Earle, C. C. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Prevention, Screening, and Surveillance Care for Breast Cancer Survivors Compared With Controls: Changes from 1998 to 2002

From the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD; and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Canada.

Corresponding author: Claire F. Snyder, PhD, Johns Hopkins University, 624 N Broadway, Rm 657, Baltimore, MD 21205; e-mail: csnyder{at}jhsph.edu.

Purpose To examine how care for breast cancer survivors compares with controls.

Patients and Methods Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results–Medicare database, we examined five cohorts of stages 1 to 3 breast cancer survivors diagnosed from 1998 to 2002. For each survivor cohort (defined by diagnosis year), we calculated the number of visits to oncology specialists, primary care providers (PCPs), and other physicians and the percentage who received influenza vaccination, cholesterol screening, colorectal cancer screening, bone densitometry, and mammography during survivorship year 1 (days 366 to 730 postdiagnosis). We compared survivors' care to that of five cohorts of screening controls who were matched to survivors on age, ethnicity, sex, and region and who had a mammogram in the survivor's year of diagnosis and to that of five cohorts of comorbidity controls who were matched on age, ethnicity, sex, region, and comorbidity. We examined whether survivors' care was associated with the mix of physician specialties that were visited.

Results A total of 23,731 survivors were matched with 23,731 screening controls and 23,396 comorbidity controls. There was no difference in trends over time in PCP visits between survivors and either control group. The survivors' rate of increase in other physician visits was greater than screening controls (P = .002) but was no different from comorbidity controls. Survivors were less likely to receive preventive care than screening controls but were more likely than comorbidity controls. Trends over time in survivors' care tended to be better than screening controls but were no different than comorbidity controls. Survivors who visited both a PCP and oncology specialist were most likely to receive recommended care.

Conclusion Involvement by both PCPs and oncology specialists can facilitate appropriate care for survivors.

Supported by an institutional research grant from the American Cancer Society.

Presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, May 30-June 3, 2008, Chicago, IL.

Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. A. Jacobs, S. C. Palmer, L. A. Schwartz, A. DeMichele, J. J. Mao, J. Carver, C. Gracia, C. E. Hill-Kayser, J. M. Metz, M. K. Hampshire, et al. Adult Cancer Survivorship: Evolution, Research, and Planning Care CA Cancer J Clin, November 1, 2009; 59(6): 391 - 410. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]