Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction Increases Healthcare Utilization and Cost

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women with unilateral breast cancer continue to rise, especially in women undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR).

Methods

We utilized administrative claims data from a large US commercial insurance database (OptumLabs) to identify women age 18–64 years who underwent IBR between January 2004 and December 2013. We compared 2-year unadjusted utilization rates and total costs of care between unilateral mastectomy (UM) and bilateral mastectomy (BM) for implant-based and autologous reconstruction. Comparisons were tested using t-test and differences in cost were estimated using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

Results

Overall, 11,235 women undergoing mastectomy with IBR were identified; 7319 with implant reconstruction [1923 UM (26%) and 5396 BM (74%)] and 3916 with autologous reconstruction [1687 UM (43%) and 2229 BM (57%)]. The overall rate of office visits (2386 vs. 2391 per 100 women, p = 0.42) and hospital readmission rate (29.1 per 100 women vs. 27.4, p = 0.06) were similar between BM + IBR and UM + IBR. Women undergoing BM + IBR had a higher emergency room (ER) visit rate (34.1 per 100 women vs. 29.8, p < 0.0001). The total 2-year cost of care was higher for BM + IBR than UM + IBR for implant reconstruction ($106,711 vs. $97,218, p < 0.0001) and for autologous reconstruction ($114,725 vs. $87,874, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

BM + IBR (autologous or implant) was associated with increased ER visits and higher total cost of care over 2 years compared with UM + IBR. Patients considering CPM should be counseled on the additional risks and costs associated with BM + IBR.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lostumbo L, Carbine NE, Wallace J. Prophylactic mastectomy for the prevention of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(11):CD002748.

  2. Tuttle TM, Habermann EB, Grund EH, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for breast cancer patients: a trend toward more aggressive surgical treatment. J Clin Oncol 2007;25(33):5203–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tuttle TM, Jarosek S, Habermann EB, Arrington A, Abraham A, Morris TJ, Virnig BA. Increasing rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2009;27(9):1362–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown D, Shao S, Jatoi I, Shriver CD, Zhu K. Trends in use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy by racial/ethnic group and ER/PR status among patients with breast cancer: a SEER population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol. 2016;42:24–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Pesce CE, Liederbach E, Czechura T, Winchester DJ, Yao K. Changing surgical trends in young patients with early stage breast cancer, 2003 to 2010: a report from the National Cancer Data Base. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;219(1):19–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Steiner CA, Weiss AJ, Barrett ML, Fingar KR, Davis H. Statistical brief #201: trends in bilateral and unilateral mastectomies in hospital inpatient and ambulatory settings, 2005–2013. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. 2015. pp. 1–14.

  7. King TA, Sakr R, Patil S, Gurevich I, Stempel M, Sampson M, Morrow M. Clinical management factors contribute to the decision for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(16):2158–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hoskin TL, Hieken TJ, Degnim AC, Jakub JW, Jacobson SR, Boughey JC. Use of immediate breast reconstruction and choice for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Surgery. 2016;159(4):1199–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Turner M. Are out-of-pocket medical costs too high? High costs may keep people from getting the care they need—or change consumer behavior to spur greater efficiency in health care. Wall Street Journal; 2016. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/are-out-of-pocket-medical-costs-too-high-1460340176.

  10. Wallace PJ, Shah ND, Dennen T, Bleicher PA, Crown WH. Optum Labs: building a novel node in the learning health care system. Health Aff (Millwood). 2014;33(7):1187–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Optum. Real world health care experiences. 2015. Available at: https://www.optum.com/content/dam/optum/resources/productSheets/5302_Data_Assets_Chart_Sheet_ISPOR.pdf.

  12. Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(6):613–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. Consumer Price Index. Chained Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (C-CPI-U) 1999-2017, Medical Care. Series ID: SUUR0000SAM. Washington, DC: Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics; 2017.

  14. Boughey JC, Attai DJ, Chen SL, et al. Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy (CPM) Consensus Statement from the American Society of Breast Surgeons: Data on CPM outcomes and risks. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3100-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Boughey JC, Attai DJ, Chen SL, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy consensus statement from the American Society of Breast Surgeons: additional considerations and a framework for shared decision making. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3106–11.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Anderson K, Jacobson JS, Heitjan DF, Zivin JG, Hershman D, Neugut AI, Grann VR. Cost-effectiveness of preventive strategies for women with a BRCA1 or a BRCA2 mutation. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(6):397–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Grann VR, Patel PR, Jacobson JS, et al. Comparative effectiveness of screening and prevention strategies among BRCA1/2-affected mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;125(3):837–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cott Chubiz JE, Lee JM, Gilmore ME, et al. Cost-effectiveness of alternating magnetic resonance imaging and digital mammography screening in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. Cancer. 2013;119(6):1266–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Zendejas B, Moriarty JP, O’Byrne J, Degnim AC, Farley DR, Boughey JC. Cost-effectiveness of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy versus routine surveillance in patients with unilateral breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(22):2993–3000.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Roberts A, Habibi M, Frick KD. Cost-effectiveness of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy for prevention of contralateral breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(7):2209–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zion SM, Slezak JM, Sellers TA, et al. Reoperations after prophylactic mastectomy with or without implant reconstruction. Cancer. 2003;98(10):2152–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Miller ME, Czechura T, Martz B, et al. Operative risks associated with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: a single institution experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(13):4113–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Silva AK, Lapin B, Yao KA, Song DH, Sisco M. The effect of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy on perioperative complications in women undergoing immediate breast reconstruction: a NSQIP analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(11):3474–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Osman F, Saleh F, Jackson TD, Corrigan MA, Cil T. Increased postoperative complications in bilateral mastectomy patients compared to unilateral mastectomy: an analysis of the NSQIP database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(10):3212–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Crosby MA, Garvey PB, Selber JC, et al. Reconstructive outcomes in patients undergoing contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(5):1025–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Boughey JC, Hoskin TL, Hartmann LC, Johnson JL, Jacobson SR, Degnim AC, Frost MH. Impact of reconstruction and reoperation on long-term patient-reported satisfaction after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(2):401–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Women’s Health and Cancer Rights Act (WHCRA). Available at: https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Programs-and-Initiatives/Other-Insurance-Protections/whcra_factsheet.html. Accessed 16 Apr 2017.

  28. Young RC. Value-based cancer care. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(27):2593–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Porter ME. What is value in health care? N Engl J Med. 2010;363(26):2477–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Judy C. Boughey MD.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 16 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (TIFF 42 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boughey, J.C., Schilz, S.R., Van Houten, H.K. et al. Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction Increases Healthcare Utilization and Cost. Ann Surg Oncol 24, 2957–2964 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5983-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5983-3

Keywords

Navigation