BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   AB 359|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 359
          Author:   Nava (D)
          Amended:  7/15/09 in Senate
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE HEALTH COMMITTEE  :  11-0, 7/8/09
          AYES:  Alquist, Strickland, Aanestad, Cedillo, Cox,  
            DeSaulnier, Leno, Maldonado, Negrete McLeod, Pavley, Wolk

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  13-0, 8/27/09
          AYES:  Kehoe, Cox, Corbett, Denham, Hancock, Leno, Oropeza,  
            Price, Runner, Walters, Wolk, Wyland, Yee

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  77-1, 06/02/09 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    Breast and cervical cancer

           SOURCE  :     Santa Barbara County


           DIGEST  :    This bill permits a provider for the Every Woman  
          Counts breast cancer screening program to employ digital  
          mammography commencing January 1, 2010, and to be  
          reimbursed by the Every Woman Counts program.

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law creates, under federal law, the  
          National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program  
          and authorizes the Centers for Disease Control and  
          Prevention to administer grants to states for screening  
          services for eligible underserved women, age 40 years and  
          older, and requires the Department of Public Health  to  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 359
                                                                Page  
          2

          provide for breast and cervical cancer screening services  
          under the grants in #1) above, at the level of funding  
          budgeted from state and other resources during the fiscal  
          year (FY) in which the Legislature has appropriated funds  
          for this purpose.  These screenings are provided under the  
          Every Woman Counts (EWC) Program and are not deemed an  
          entitlement.  Provides that analog mammography is covered  
          by the EWC Program.

           Background
           
           Digital mammography  .  One of the most recent advances in  
          x-ray mammography is digital (computerized) mammography.   
          Digital mammography is similar to standard (analog)  
          mammography in that x-rays are used to produce detailed  
          images of the breast.  Digital mammography uses essentially  
          the same mammography system as analog mammography, but the  
          system is equipped with a digital receptor and a computer  
          instead of a film cassette.  

          To date, studies of digital mammography and standard analog  
          mammography have shown that digital mammography is  
          generally comparable to analog in terms of detecting breast  
          cancer.  In 2001, the National Cancer Institute (NCI)  
          initiated a large trial to compare the two types of  
          mammography.  NCI released preliminary findings which  
          showed no difference in detecting breast cancer for the  
          general population of women.  However, NCI reported that  
          women who had dense breasts, were younger than age 50, or  
          had reached or were near menopause, may benefit from  
          digital, rather than analog mammography.  A study published  
          in the March 2001 issue of Radiologic Clinics of North  
          America also found that the use of digital mammography can  
          lead to fewer callbacks (repeat mammograms) than analog  
          mammography.  Other reported benefits of digital  
          mammography include: 

          1. Improved contrast between dense and non-dense breast  
             tissue.

          2. Faster image acquisition.

          3. Shorter exam time.


                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 359
                                                                Page  
          3

          4. Easier image storage.

          5. Physician manipulation of breast images for more  
             accurate detection.

          6. Transmittal of images over phone lines or a network for  
             remote consultation with other physicians.  

          Digital mammography systems cost between one and one-half  
          to four times as much as standard analog mammography  
          systems.  While procedural time saved by using digital  
          mammography over standard analog mammography justifies part  
          of the cost for facilities that perform several thousand  
          mammograms each year, studies are currently underway to  
          determine whether the high cost of digital mammography is  
          justifiable in terms of its benefits in detecting breast  
          cancer.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  9/1/09)

          County of Santa Barbara (source)
          American Cancer Society
          American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists,  
          District IX/CA
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal  
          Employees, AFL-CIO
          California Commission on the Status of Women
          California Communities United Institute
          California Health Collaborative
          California Primary Care Association
          California Radiological Society
          City and County of San Francisco
          Medical Oncology Association of Southern California, Inc.


           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    Proponents state that, as more and  
          more providers transition to digital mammography equipment,  
          analog mammography becomes less available and women who  
          depend on this screening through the Every Woman Counts  
          Program face an access issue.  Proponents further state  
          that, this bill ensures that a screening option is still  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                AB 359
                                                                Page  
          4

          available in the absence of analog mammography.  Proponents  
          contend that early breast cancer screening leads to early  
          diagnosis which means a much higher survival rate, and this  
          bill ensures that women have access to this basic screening  
          tool. 


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Tom  
            Berryhill, Blakeslee, Blumenfield, Brownley, Buchanan,  
            Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway,  
            Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Duvall,  
            Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,  
            Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,  
            Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber,  
            Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Krekorian, Lieu, Logue,  
            Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava,  
            Nestande, Niello, John A. Perez, V. Manuel Perez,  
            Portantino, Price, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva,  
            Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson,  
            Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, Bass
          NOES:  Nielsen
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Bill Berryhill, Block


          DLW:do  9/1/09   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****















                                                           CONTINUED