Limiting surveillance imaging for patients with lymphoma in remission: a mixed methods study leading to a Choosing Wisely recommendation
- 28 May 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by BMJ in BMJ Quality & Safety
- Vol. 30 (4), 300-310
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-010756
Abstract
Background Under the ‘Choosing Wisely’ (CW) framework, professional organisations internationally have advocated limiting imaging for asymptomatic patients following curative cancer therapy, based on limited value and high cost. F18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography-CT (PET/CT) was widely adopted locally for surveillance lymphoma imaging after 2004. Objectives Prior to ratification of a local CW recommendation to limit surveillance imaging in lymphoma, we aimed to assess: (A) performance characteristics of surveillance FDG-PET/CT; (B) rates, clinical consequences and costs of false positives (FP); and (C) patients and professionals’ attitudes towards overuse. Methods Mixed methods (quantitative and qualitative) study. We analysed surveillance FDG-PET/CT results of two patient cohorts (n1=215 Hodgkin lymphoma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma; n2=203 Hodgkin lymphoma only). FPs were defined by negative biopsy or clinical follow-up. We held focus group discussions and in-depth interviews eliciting attitudes of 26 patients and 11 clinicians, respectively. Results FPs were observed in 25.1% (95% CI 20.5 to 30.5) per scan—cohort 1, and 41.7% (95% CI 37.9 to 45.6) per patient—cohort 2, engendering frequent additional testing. Specific characteristics and location of findings altered the FP rate. The estimated cost per relapse detected was $50 000 (cohort 2). Patients sought reassurance via surveillance imaging, which they considered highly accurate, yet stressful. Aware of radiation risks, they were largely unconcerned about consequences of FPs. Confidence in the treating physicians was an important factor in patients’ acceptance of forgoing imaging. Clinicians, frequently under patient pressure to order imaging, generally believed that it did not affect prognosis (with important exceptions), welcomed professional guidelines, but rejected regulatory restrictions on its use. Conclusion Acceptance of CW recommendations to limit overuse may be enhanced by quantitative data on consequences and costs of surveillance imaging, supplemented by qualitative data on patient and physician attitudes.Keywords
Funding Information
- Israel National Institute for Health Policy Research (2014/16/א)
This publication has 63 references indexed in Scilit:
- Prostate Cancer Imaging Trends After a Nationwide Effort to Discourage Inappropriate Prostate Cancer ImagingJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2013
- Positron emission tomography/computed tomography surveillance in patients with lymphoma: a fox hunt?Haematologica, 2012
- Positron emission tomography/computed tomography surveillance in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma in first remission has a low positive predictive value and high costsHaematologica, 2011
- WINPEPI updated: computer programs for epidemiologists, and their teaching potentialEpidemiologic Perspectives & Innovations, 2011
- Surveillance CT scans are a source of anxiety and fear of recurrence in long-term lymphoma survivorsAnnals of Oncology, 2010
- Surveillance imaging of Hodgkin lymphoma patients in first remissionCancer, 2010
- The International Harmonization Project for Response Criteria in Lymphoma Clinical TrialsHematology/Oncology Clinics of North America, 2007
- What does positron emission tomography offer oncology?European Journal of Cancer, 2000
- The Utility of Follow-up Testing After Curative Cancer TherapyJournal of General Internal Medicine, 1997
- Follow up policy after treatment for Hodgkin's disease: too many clinic visits and routine tests? A review of hospital recordsBMJ, 1997