Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Biomarkers in metastatic breast cancer: Do they make a difference?

J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD
Conditions
October 27, 2016
191 Shares
Share
Tweet
Share

When it comes to our health and our health care, we love the numbers. Sometimes, we even fall in love with the numbers, assuming that the numbers tell us the whole story when, in fact, that may not be the case. Cholesterol numbers, blood pressure numbers, body mass index, whatever. As patients and consumers, we are frequently defined by our numbers.

But what happens when those numbers and other medical tests, such as CT scans, really don’t tell the story we think they do? The recent evolution of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is a case in point. For decades, we believed the numbers saved many lives. It turns out, PSA did save some lives, but not as many as we thought and at the considerable financial and human expense of treating many men who probably did not benefit.

So in that vein, an article and editorial in a recent issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology makes the point that just because we have numbers, it does not really mean they offer us the scientific certainty about the course of cancer we may think they do.

The research reviews the use of various biomarkers (called serum tumor markers or STMs) and imaging tests (CT and PET scans) in women with metastatic breast cancer. The researchers looked at Medicare data from 2002 and 2011 to find women who received more than 12 blood tests with biomarkers (CEA, CA 15-3, CA 27.29) and/or more than four CTs and/or PET scans in a 12-month period and compared outcomes with women who received fewer tests over that same period of time. Their goal was to determine whether those who had more testing did better than those who had fewer tests.

It turns out about 40% of the women older than 65 with metastatic breast cancer had both the blood tests and imaging studies done periodically to monitor the progress of their disease. Of this group, about 1 in 3 had the status of their breast cancer monitored very frequently during the 12-month segments. The annual costs of treating those who were tested frequently was almost 60% more than the cost of treating compared women with the same illness but who didn’t have all those studies.

All this would be irrelevant if frequent testing led to improved quality and/or years of life. But the authors found no such thing. Overall survival was not improved by frequent disease monitoring. Moreover, they point out there aren’t any generally accepted guidelines that tell health professionals which tests to order and how frequently they should be done, so we really don’t know the right answer to how often these tests are necessary.

The conclusion?

From the authors:

Currently, in the metastatic setting, there is no evidence to suggest that more frequent testing is associated with better outcomes … Furthermore, in women with early-stage breast cancer, surveillance testing, which can result in earlier treatment initiation, does not affect survival.

The editorial that accompanied the research report essentially agreed with the report’s authors:

Despite its availability for more than two decades and provision of prognostic information, no evidence indicates that STM (serum tumor markers) monitoring changes the course of the disease. Since 1999, ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) has recommended explicitly against STM use for surveillance after treatment of early-stage breast cancer, yet 42% of Medicare-age breast cancer survivors undergo STM assessment an average of almost three times a year, which results in 20% higher medical costs with no known impact on survival. Similarly, ASCO has recommended against the routine use of STMS in MBC (metastatic breast cancer) in the absence of other measureable disease since 2006, with all subsequent updates confirming this initial guideline.

This appears to be a lesson we keep on learning: we have tests, we do tests, we think tests help us make better decisions by “staying on top” of someone’s cancer and sometimes we find out — when the evidence is finally looked at carefully — that the tests really don’t make a difference.

No one likes to think of costs when it comes to medical care, especially when saving lives. But while a lab test or an imaging study may not make a difference to our care or the outcome of our illness, it certainly does make a difference to our pocketbook. And even worse, it may give us a false sense of comfort when it doesn’t accurately reflect a change in our disease or sends us down another, perhaps, more toxic path of treatment when it wouldn’t make a difference to do so.

Those are all very serious questions that must be answered.

Many years ago we routinely did bone scans to follow women diagnosed and treated for primary breast cancer. We firmly believed that if we found a new bone lesion early and started therapy immediately at the first evidence the disease had recurred and spread, we would save lives. We were wrong. The evidence showed us it didn’t make a difference, so we stopped doing the test.

Years later, we are still learning the same lessons. Sometimes doing lots of tests makes all of us feel better. It helps us feel in control. It helps us feel that we are going to be able to change the course of our illness and treatment at the earliest moment and, as a result, improve our outcome. But despite all of those considerations, we need to look at the evidence and understand that sometimes that just is not the case.

There are no easy answers to these questions. Health professionals and patients have their own thoughts and their own expectations, and there is no question that each personal situation is different sometimes requiring stepping outside the guidelines or currently accepted practice.

However, even understanding that consideration, we also need to realize that just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should, or that it really makes a difference. We need to look at the evidence, we need to understand the evidence, we need to listen to the evidence and let that be our guide — especially and most importantly when the message the evidence offers differs from what we think we already know.

Easy to say, difficult to do. It is a lesson we keep on learning. Maybe it’s time we paid attention to the message.

J. Leonard Lichtenfeld is deputy chief medical officer, American Cancer Society. He blogs at Dr. Len’s Cancer Blog.

Image credit: Shutterstock.com 

Prev

The unacceptable cost of silence

October 27, 2016 Kevin 5
…
Next

Doctors risk emotional trauma

October 27, 2016 Kevin 1
…

Tagged as: Oncology/Hematology

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The unacceptable cost of silence
Next Post >
Doctors risk emotional trauma

More by J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD

  • Why won’t unproven COVID treatments go away?

    J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD
  • How can we improve the quality of medications?

    J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD
  • Sunscreens: The balancing act between safety and cancer prevention

    J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD

Related Posts

  • When breast cancer screening guidelines conflict: Some patients face real consequences

    Leda Dederich
  • Questions about pharma pricing and marketing

    Martha Rosenberg
  • The health effects of structural racism

    Niran S. Al-Agba, MD
  • Hormone replacement therapy is still linked to cancer

    Martha Rosenberg
  • We have a shot at preventing cervical cancer

    Lisa N. Abaid, MD, MPH
  • Obstruction of medical justice: How health care fails patients with cancer

    Miriam A. Knoll, MD

More in Conditions

  • Unlocking the secrets of cancer conferences: an end-of-life counselor’s journey among pharmaceutical giants

    Althea Halchuck, EJD
  • An obstetrician-gynecologist reveals the truth about reproductive planning and how to navigate society’s expectations

    Yuliya Malayev, DO, MPH
  • Nose-brain connection: The surprising link between allergies and mental health revealed

    Kara Wada, MD
  • Is the rise in mental illness due to greater awareness or a true increase in incidence?

    Zahid Awan, MD
  • A patient’s perspective on the diminishing relationship between doctors and patients

    Michele Luckenbaugh
  • How misused terminology and biased studies may be misguiding our understanding of opioid addiction and mortality

    Richard A. Lawhern, PhD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A patient’s perspective on the diminishing relationship between doctors and patients

      Michele Luckenbaugh | Conditions
    • Unmasking wage disparity in health care: the truth behind the Elmhurst Hospital physician strike

      Kevin Pho, MD | KevinMD
    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • How electronic health records preserve patients’ legacies in the words of oncologists

      Marc Braunstein, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

      Osmund Agbo, MD | Policy
    • Emulating Michael Jordan’s winning mindset: a path to success for health care professionals and entrepreneurs

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The growing threat to transgender health care: implications for patients, providers, and trainees

      Carson Hartlage | Policy
    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Raw humanity on night float: inspiring patient encounters and overcoming challenges

      Johnathan Yao, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is AI the solution for the shortage of nephrologists? ChatGPT weighs in.

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Tech
    • Unlocking the secrets of cancer conferences: an end-of-life counselor’s journey among pharmaceutical giants

      Althea Halchuck, EJD | Conditions
    • Why HIPAA is failing and what you need to know to protect your data [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Revolutionizing emergency medicine: Overcoming long-term challenges with innovative solutions for physicians and patients

      Anonymous | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 1 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

CME Spotlights

From MedPage Today

Latest News

  • What Drug Did FDA Just Approve for COVID?
  • PET Scan for Alzheimer's Dx; Predicting Colon Cancer Survival
  • What Happens When We Classify Kids' Weight as a 'Disease'?
  • Sotagliflozin Gets FDA's Blessing for Heart Failure
  • Cardiorespiratory Monitoring Can Be Telling of Outcomes in Extremely Preterm Infants

Meeting Coverage

  • No Access to Routine Healthcare Biggest Barrier to HPV Vaccination
  • Trial Results Spark Talk of Curing More Metastatic Cervical Cancers
  • Cross-Border Collaboration Improves Survival in Pediatric Leukemia Patients
  • Monoclonal Antibody Reduced Need For Transfusions in Low-Risk MDS
  • Less-Invasive Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer Proves Safe, Effective
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • A patient’s perspective on the diminishing relationship between doctors and patients

      Michele Luckenbaugh | Conditions
    • Unmasking wage disparity in health care: the truth behind the Elmhurst Hospital physician strike

      Kevin Pho, MD | KevinMD
    • Why affirmative action is crucial for health equity and social justice in medicine

      Katrina Gipson, MD, MPH | Policy
    • How electronic health records preserve patients’ legacies in the words of oncologists

      Marc Braunstein, MD, PhD | Physician
    • Unmasking the brutal reality of gun violence in America: a call to action for unity and meaningful change

      Osmund Agbo, MD | Policy
    • Emulating Michael Jordan’s winning mindset: a path to success for health care professionals and entrepreneurs

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • The growing threat to transgender health care: implications for patients, providers, and trainees

      Carson Hartlage | Policy
    • Breaking point: the 5 reasons American doctors are dreaming of walking away from medicine

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Physician
    • “Is your surgeon really skilled? The hidden threat to public safety in medicine.

      Gene Uzawa Dorio, MD | Physician
    • It’s time to replace the 0 to 10 pain intensity scale with a better measure

      Mark Sullivan, MD and Jane Ballantyne, MD | Conditions
    • Breaking the cycle of racism in health care: a call for anti-racist action

      Tomi Mitchell, MD | Policy
    • Revolutionize your practice: the value-based care model that reduces physician burnout

      Chandravadan Patel, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why doctors aren’t to blame for the U.S. opioid crisis [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Raw humanity on night float: inspiring patient encounters and overcoming challenges

      Johnathan Yao, MD, MPH | Physician
    • Is AI the solution for the shortage of nephrologists? ChatGPT weighs in.

      Amol Shrikhande, MD | Tech
    • Unlocking the secrets of cancer conferences: an end-of-life counselor’s journey among pharmaceutical giants

      Althea Halchuck, EJD | Conditions
    • Why HIPAA is failing and what you need to know to protect your data [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Revolutionizing emergency medicine: Overcoming long-term challenges with innovative solutions for physicians and patients

      Anonymous | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Biomarkers in metastatic breast cancer: Do they make a difference?
1 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...