Live data from Hacker News

One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

pharmatimes.com

41–50 of 236 posts

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#41
post #6

> The average cost of a WB-MRI scan for NSCLC patients was £317 Wow! $3000+ here in the US. Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

State of the art MRI machine costs $3 million up front. Would take 20 scans a week, every week, for 10 years to break even on that investment at $300 per scan. Not counting physician & staff time or cost of capital.

Well if you are not including external costs, you can get a MRI machine at around $100k to $500 depending on your needs[0].

[0]:https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/IN-16CT-Hospital-Medi...

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#42
post #13

Many doctors hate full body scans. Every individual has a handful of anomalies which are almost always benign. They show up on full body scans and chasing them down comes with cost and patient risk. I have a hard time with reporting like this that doesn't quantify cost of biopsy on false-positives as well as cost of complications from examining false-positives. Source: worked in clinical research for 2 years.

It seems like the solution to this would be more frequent scans, so doctors can determine what's a static anomaly, and what is actually changing over time.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't a doctor see an anomaly and decide not to chase it down based on the same reasoning that they use to not scan for it? Is there some pointless legal trap related to malpractice where the only allowable "don't operate" decision happens when the doctor decides what to test for?

I think the pointless trap is often the patient. I worry less than some but more than many, and while I usually defer to my doctor's advice to leave most of life's little lumps and bumps be, it's a challenge for me to accept the unknown. I imagine that many patients will demand answers once they know that any anomaly exists, no matter how likely the benign explanation is.

Yeah, just look at the number of people that demand antibiotics, even if a doctor thinks its viral, and the number of doctors that capitulate to those demands.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only 20 scans a week? A scan takes 30-60 minutes. So even if they only work 8 hour days and assume an hour for lunch/flex that's 35 scans per 5 day week. If they use it on weekends at all or run it for more than eight hours, that's just gravy. I'm not sure where you got the 20 scans a week number.

Because scans are not booked wall to wall every hour of every day. Needs more likely follow a poisson distribution with ample waits in between uses. To try and pack it that densely, with the large variation in how people show up at the hospital, would cause bottlenecks and loss of service. 20 a week is a more common number for most places. Here's actual data [1] measured on site. The usage is indeed around 50%, so th…

A lot has changed since 2011 but even back then the MR scanner should always have been full and the next patient should have been waiting outside. If a scanner is very early or late you call the next patients and alter scheduling. Anything else is a waste of time and money.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#45
post #13

Many doctors hate full body scans. Every individual has a handful of anomalies which are almost always benign. They show up on full body scans and chasing them down comes with cost and patient risk. I have a hard time with reporting like this that doesn't quantify cost of biopsy on false-positives as well as cost of complications from examining false-positives. Source: worked in clinical research for 2 years.

Why can't a doctor see an anomaly and decide not to chase it down based on the same reasoning that they use to not scan for it? Is there some pointless legal trap related to malpractice where the only allowable "don't operate" decision happens when the doctor decides what to test for?

Yeah, emotions, money and politics aside, more information is surely better, even if not now, in the long run as processes improve.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#46
post #13

Many doctors hate full body scans. Every individual has a handful of anomalies which are almost always benign. They show up on full body scans and chasing them down comes with cost and patient risk. I have a hard time with reporting like this that doesn't quantify cost of biopsy on false-positives as well as cost of complications from examining false-positives. Source: worked in clinical research for 2 years.

Why do doctors advocate less frequent scans when they see that frequent scans creates false positives? Can a metric be invented such that a doctor can make a solid decision "I'm 99% sure this wont kill you in two years" and leave the tumour alone?

We don’t advocate less frequent scans, we advocate targeted scans. Because the probability of a positive result being a false positive depends heavily on the population. In a population with a high baseline frequency, the probability of a positive being false is relatively low; in a population with a low baseline frequency, the likelihood of a positive being false is relatively high.

So, you don’t mammogram every person with a breast. You mammogram people with advanced age, genetic predisposition, etc. so as to select for a population with a reasonable baseline frequency. Various professional bodies and the USPTF put a lot of effort into determining what the optimal screening population is.

Clinical decision rules are an extremely active part of medical research. Trying to figure out a reasonable predictive model to say “definitely follow up on this” or “definitely don’t” is a huge field in medicine. For instance, in patients ≥35 years old with incidental pulmonary nodules on CT imaging, we have the Fleischner Guidelines for when and which follow-up is appropriate. But it required a number of prospective external validation studies in order to properly validate it, and it’s for one super specific population: under-35 incidental pulmonary nodule on non-cancer-screening CT. So, you can imagine how much work there is to be done for the other 10,000 kinds of incidentalomas.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#47
post #24
post #13

Many doctors hate full body scans. Every individual has a handful of anomalies which are almost always benign. They show up on full body scans and chasing them down comes with cost and patient risk. I have a hard time with reporting like this that doesn't quantify cost of biopsy on false-positives as well as cost of complications from examining false-positives. Source: worked in clinical research for 2 years.

Similarly, the doctor who discovered Prostate Specific Antigen regrets that is used to screen for prostate cancer because of its inaccuracy, questionable benefits and substantial harm created by biopsies and treatment of prostate cancer: https://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/opinion/10Ablin.html

Off-topic, just spreading knowledge. Check out IsoPSA [1], which is a simple blood test procedure superior to PSA (unfortunately, not available in US, yet).

[1] https://www.cleveland-diagnostics.com/isopsa

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#48
post #30

My wife has had full body scans every 3 months for the past 3 years. She currently has multiple active sites of bone mets, from the spine to shoulders and hips. A single scan is much more convenient and keeps the oncologist up to date with the state of her cancer. In our experience sometimes a new cancer site isn't diagnosed quickly, especially if it's asymptomatic and slow growing. Having past scans and reviewing th…

What's the primary Cancer type? I'm assuming multiple myeloma?

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#49
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but you don't do 20 scans a week, you do that per day

Isn't 20 scans a day something like 15 hours of continuous, back-to-back scanning?

Some scans are very fast. For a basic knee scan done well it’s 10-15 minutes of imaging time and lumbar spine scans are a couple of minutes longer. With 2 staff the changeover can be a minute of 3. With good scheduling the scans that are similar are booked back to back and equipment changes are minimal.

Re: One whole-body MRI could replace multiple cancer scans

#50
post #13

Many doctors hate full body scans. Every individual has a handful of anomalies which are almost always benign. They show up on full body scans and chasing them down comes with cost and patient risk. I have a hard time with reporting like this that doesn't quantify cost of biopsy on false-positives as well as cost of complications from examining false-positives. Source: worked in clinical research for 2 years.

Limiting patient information for fear of false positive seems like a backwards step.
Post reply on HN