Tag: oncology

Making Screening Better

Posted on by Brian Casey

While population-based cancer screening has demonstrated its value, there’s no question that screening could use improvement. Two new studies this week show how to improve on one of screening’s biggest challenges: getting patients to attend their follow-up exams.

In the first study in JACR, researchers from the University of Rochester wanted to see if notifying people about actionable findings shortly after screening exams had an impact on follow-up rates. Patients were notified within one to three weeks after the radiology report was completed. 

They also examined different methods for patient communication, including snail-mail letters, notifications from Epic’s MyChart electronic patient portal, and phone calls. In approximately 2.5k patients within one month of due date, they found that follow-up adherence rates varied for each outreach method as follows:

  • Phone calls – 60%
  • Letters – 57%
  • Controls – 53%
  • MyChart notifications – 36%

(The researchers noted that the COVID-19 pandemic may have disproportionately affected those in the MyChart group.) 

Fortunately, the university uses natural language processing-based software called Backstop to make sure no follow-up recommendations fall through the cracks. 

  • Backstop includes Nuance’s mPower technology to identify actionable findings from unstructured radiology reports; it triggers notifications to both primary care providers and patients about the need to complete follow-up.

Once the full round of Backstop notifications had taken place, compliance rates rose and there was no statistically significant difference between how patients got the early notification: letter (89%), phone (91%), MyChart (90%), and control (88%). 

In the second study, researchers in JAMA described how they used automated algorithms to analyze EHR data from 12k patients to identify those eligible for follow-up for cancer screening exams.

  • They then tested three levels of intervention to get people to their exams, ranging from EHR reminders to outreach to patient navigation to all three. 

Patients who got EHR reminders, outreach, and navigation or EHR reminders and outreach had the highest follow-up completion rates at 120 days compared to usual care (31% for both vs. 23%). Rates were similar to usual care for those who only got EHR reminders (23%).

The Takeaway

This week’s studies indicate that while health technology is great, it’s how you use it that matters. While IT tools can identify the people who need follow-up, it’s up to healthcare personnel to make sure patients get the care they need.

Value of Cancer Screening

Posted on by Brian Casey

A new study claims that medical screening for diseases like breast and cervical cancer has saved lives and generated value of at least $7.5T (yes, trillion) over the last 25 years. The findings, published in BMC Health Services Research, are a stunning rebuke to critics of screening exams.

While the vast majority of doctors and public health officials support evidence-based screening, a vocal minority of skeptics continues to raise questions about screening’s efficacy. These critics emphasize the “harms” of screening, such as overdiagnosis and patient anxiety – an accusation often levied against breast screening. 

Screening’s critics also target the downstream costs of medical tests intended to confirm suspicious findings. They argue that a single screen-detected finding can lead to a cascade of additional healthcare spending that drives up medical costs.

But the new study offers a counter-argument, putting a dollar figure on how much screening exams have saved by detecting disease earlier, when it can be treated more effectively. 

The research focused on the four main cancer screening tests – breast, cervical, colon, and lung cancer – analyzing the impact of preventive screening on life-years saved and its economic impact from 1996 to 2020, finding …

  • Americans enjoyed at least 12M more years of life thanks to cancer screening
  • The economic value of these life-years added up to at least $7.5T
  • If everyone who qualified for screening exams got them, it would save at least another 3.3M life-years and $1.7T in economic impact
  • Cervical cancer screening had by far the biggest economic impact ($5.2T-$5.7T), followed by breast ($0.8T-$1.9T), colorectal ($0.4T-$1T), and finally lung ($40B). 

Lung cancer’s paltry value was due to a small eligible population and low screening adherence rates. This finding is underscored by a new article in STAT that ponders why CT lung cancer screening rates are so low, with one observer calling it the “redheaded stepchild” of screening tests.  

The Takeaway
Screening skeptics have been taking it on the chin lately (witness the USPSTF’s U-turn on mammography for younger women) and the new findings will be another blow. We may continue to see a dribble of papers on the “harms” of overdiagnosis, but the momentum is definitely shifting in screening’s favor – to the benefit of patients.

Radiation and Cancer Risk

Posted on by Brian Casey

New research on the cancer risk of low-dose ionizing radiation could have disturbing implications for those who are exposed to radiation on the job – including medical professionals. In a new study in BMJ, researchers found that nuclear workers exposed to occupational levels of radiation had a cancer mortality risk that was higher than previously estimated.

The link between low-dose radiation and cancer has long been controversial. Most studies on the radiation-cancer connection are based on Japanese atomic bomb survivors, many of whom were exposed to far higher levels of radiation than most people receive over their lifetimes – even those who work with ionizing radiation. 

The question is whether that data can be extrapolated to people exposed to much lower levels of radiation, such as nuclear workers, medical professionals, or even patients. To that end, researchers in the International Nuclear Workers Study (INWORKS) have been tracking low-dose radiation exposure and its connection to mortality in nearly 310k people in France, the UK, and the US who worked in the nuclear industry from 1944 to 2016.

INWORKS researchers previously published studies showing low-dose radiation exposure to be carcinogenic, but the new findings in BMJ offer an even stronger link. For the study, researchers tracked radiation exposure based on dosimetry badges worn by the workers and then rates of cancer mortality, and calculated rates of death from solid cancer based on their exposure levels, finding: 

  • Mortality risk was higher for solid cancers, at 52% per 1 Gy of exposure
  • Individuals who received the occupational radiation limit of 20 mSv per year would have a 5.2% increased solid cancer mortality rate over five years
  • There was a linear association between low-dose radiation exposure and cancer mortality, meaning that cancer mortality risk was also found at lower levels of exposure 
  • The dose-response association seen the study was even higher than in studies of atomic bomb survivors (52% vs. 32%)

The Takeaway

Even though the INWORKS study was conducted on nuclear workers rather than medical professionals, the findings could have implications for those who might be exposed to medical radiation, such as interventional radiologists and radiologic technologists. The study will undoubtedly be examined by radiation protection organizations and government regulators; the question is whether it leads to any changes in rules on occupational radiation exposure.

Theranostics Grabs SNMMI Spotlight

Posted on by Brian Casey

The emerging field of theranostics – in which two radiopharmaceuticals work in tandem for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes – is one of the most exciting new areas of medicine. Nowhere is this more evident than at this week’s SNMMI 2023 meeting in Chicago. 

Theranostics involves the use first of a highly targeted diagnostic radiotracer to detect pathology with a technology like PET, then sending in another tracer to deliver a stronger radioactive payload to the site of disease – almost the definition of precision medicine. Some estimates are that theranostics could soon develop into a market worth $30B.

In addition to talks on theranostics, SNMMI 2023 highlights so far have included presentations covering the following:

  • An ultra-high-resolution brain PET scanner that can visualize and quantify nuclei in the brainstem for the first time, opening up new inquiries into neurological disorders like Alzheimer’s disease
  • The discovery of the optimal tracer kinetic model for quantifying myocardial uptake of 18F-flutemetamol in patients with transthyretin (ATTR) cardiac amyloidosis, a buildup of amyloid plaque in the heart
  • A technique called augmented whole-body scanning via magnifying PET (AWSM-PET) that uses two high-resolution add-on detectors as an “outsert” to improve image resolution and reduce noise
  • Imaging of rheumatoid arthritis with 68Ga-FAPI PET/CT, which showed a greater number and degree of affected joints than FDG-PET/CT
  • A PET radiotracer called 18F-Cholestify has the potential to improve neuroimaging by visualizing metabolic cholesterol degradation in the brain.

The commercial side of SNMMI 2023 is active as well. Siemens Healthineers, GE HealthCare, and United Imaging Healthcare are launching new hybrid scanners, and other vendor news includes the following: 

  • Blue Earth Diagnostics is touting its recent shipments of Posluma, a PET radiotracer targeting PSMA in prostate cancer patients
  • GE HealthCare is migrating AIR technologies found on its MRI scanners to its new Signa PET/MRI AIR system (see below) 
  • Isotopia is discussing its plans for a US radioisotope manufacturing facility
  • Lantheus researchers are presenting talks on AI-enabled PSMA-PET reporting using its Pylarify AI software
  • Mediso received FDA clearance for its InterView Fusion and InterView XP multimodality image processing and reporting software
  • Siemens Healthineers has launched a new PET/CT scanner, Biograph Vision.X, sporting a 20% improvement in time of flight (see below)
  • Subtle Medical is demonstrating its SubtlePET solution, which uses AI to remove noise for low-count PET images, enabling up to 75% faster PET scans
  • Telix Pharmaceuticals is highlighting clinical results of several agents: the Illucix gallium-based prostate cancer imaging agent; ProstACT lutetium-based antibody-directed prostate cancer therapy; and TLX250-CDx, a zircon-89-based tracer for diagnosing clear cell renal cell carcinoma.
  • United Imaging Healthcare is launching uMI Panorama, a new wide-bore PET/CT scanner (see below).  

The Takeaway

This week’s proceedings in Chicago illustrate the new energy that theranostics is bringing to nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, one of radiology’s most venerable modalities. Stay tuned for the announcement of SNMMI’s Henry N. Wagner, Jr. Image of the Year award, always a conference highlight.  

Get every issue of The Imaging Wire, delivered right to your inbox.

You might also like..

Select All

You're signed up!

It's great to have you as a reader. Check your inbox for a welcome email.

-- The Imaging Wire team

You're all set!