Breast Cancer Risk Information Research Articles

Mammographic texture versus conventional Cumulus measure of density in breast cancer risk prediction: a literature review.

Mammographic textures show promise as breast cancer risk predictors, distinct from mammographic density. Yet, it lacks comprehensive evidence to determine the stronger risk predictor between textures and density, and the reliability of texture-based measures. We searched PubMed database for research publications, published up to November 2023, which assessed breast cancer risk associations(odds ratios[OR]) with texture-based measures and percent mammographic density(PMD), and their discrimination(area under the receiver operating characteristics curve[AUC]), using same datasets. Of 11 publications, for textures, six found stronger associations(P<0.05) with 11%-508% increases on log scale by study and four found weaker associations(P<0.05) with 14%-100% decreases, compared with PMD. Risk associations remained significant when fitting textures and PMD together. Eleven of 17 publications show greater AUCs for textures than PMD(P<0.05); increases were 0.04-0.25 by study. Discrimination of PMD and these textures jointly was significantly higher than PMD alone (P<0.05). Therefore, different textures could capture distinct breast cancer risk information, partially independent of mammographic density, suggesting their joint role in breast cancer risk prediction. Certain textures could outperform mammographic density for predicting breast cancer risk. However, obtaining reliable texture-based measures necessitates addressing various issues. Collaboration of researchers from diverse fields could be beneficial for advancing this complex field.

Abstract PO4-08-06: Causal Relationships and Familial Aggregation of Mammogram Risk Scores: Insights from Breast Cancer in Twins and Families

Abstract Background: Mammogram risk scores based on texture and density, determined by brightness thresholds, are associated with breast cancer risk differently and could reveal distinct information about breast cancer risk. This study aimed to investigate the causal relationships between these intercorrelated risk scores and the familial aggregation of a texture-based mammogram measure, shedding light on the relevance to breast cancer aetiology. Methods: We analysed data from the Australian Mammographic Density Twins and Sisters Study, including 3195 breast-cancer-free women from 1519 families. The dataset comprised 527 pairs of monozygotic (MZ) twins, 271 pairs of dizygotic (DZ) twins, and 1599 sisters. The average age at mammography for sister pairs ranged from 40 to 70 years. Mammogram risk scores based on texture (named Cirrus) and three density-defined areas (light, bright, and brightest) that were spatially independent were generated. The Inference about Causation from Examination of Familial Confounding (ICE FALCON) method was employed for causal inference. Familial aggregation and the variance of Cirrus were assessed as a function of age using a multivariate normal model for pedigree analysis. The classic twin model was employed but allowing for varying shared environmental effects among different sister pairs. The single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP)-based heritability was estimated using genetic variants from both closely and distantly related individuals. Model fits were compared using likelihood ratio tests and the Akaike Information Criterion. Results: Causal analysis using ICE FALCON revealed significant positive causal effects, with Cirrus, light areas, and bright areas influencing the brightest areas (accounting for 34%, 55%, and 85% of the associations, respectively). Similarly, light areas and bright areas demonstrated causal effects on Cirrus (accounting for 37% and 28% of the associations, respectively). No age-related differences in familial correlations or Cirrus variance were found for women aged 40 to 70 years. Familial correlations were estimated at 0.51 (0.03) for MZ pairs and 0.16 (0.03) for combined DZ and non-twin sister pairs, with no significant difference between DZ and non-twin sister pairs (P=0.3). Additive genetic effects accounted for up to 32% (5%) of the variance, consistent with SNP-based heritability estimates of 36% (12%). MZ-specific environmental effects contributed to at least 20% (3%), while shared environmental effects for DZ and non-twin sibling pairs accounted for less than 40% of that for MZ pairs. Conclusion: In a mammogram, the lighter (less dense) areas causally influence the brightest (highly dense) areas, including through textural features. These causal relationships provide insights into the relative importance of different mammogram features in breast cancer aetiology. For example, the brightest areas are more aetiologically important for screen-detected breast cancer, while the light areas are more aetiologically important for interval breast cancer. Additionally, specific textural features capture aetiologically independent breast cancer risk information from dense areas. We also confirm the partial heritability of Cirrus, the texture-based mammogram measure, substantially influenced by environmental factors (familial and non-familial). As well as genetic factors, Cirrus could be determined by factors operating at times of life when MZ pairs share their environments to a greater extent than do DZ and non-twin sisters, starting in utero and prior to adulthood, and remaining constant thereafter. These insights from twin and family data enhance our understanding of mammogram risk scores and their implications for breast cancer risk assessment. Citation Format: Zhoufeng Ye, Shuai Li, Gill Dite, Tuong Nguyen, Robert MacInnis, John Hopper. Causal Relationships and Familial Aggregation of Mammogram Risk Scores: Insights from Breast Cancer in Twins and Families [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO4-08-06.

Causal relationships between breast cancer risk factors based on mammographic features

BackgroundMammogram risk scores based on texture and density defined by different brightness thresholds are associated with breast cancer risk differently and could reveal distinct information about breast cancer risk. We aimed to investigate causal relationships between these intercorrelated mammogram risk scores to determine their relevance to breast cancer aetiology.MethodsWe used digitised mammograms for 371 monozygotic twin pairs, aged 40–70 years without a prior diagnosis of breast cancer at the time of mammography, from the Australian Mammographic Density Twins and Sisters Study. We generated normalised, age-adjusted, and standardised risk scores based on textures using the Cirrus algorithm and on three spatially independent dense areas defined by increasing brightness threshold: light areas, bright areas, and brightest areas. Causal inference was made using the Inference about Causation from Examination of FAmilial CONfounding (ICE FALCON) method.ResultsThe mammogram risk scores were correlated within twin pairs and with each other (r = 0.22–0.81; all P < 0.005). We estimated that 28–92% of the associations between the risk scores could be attributed to causal relationships between the scores, with the rest attributed to familial confounders shared by the scores. There was consistent evidence for positive causal effects: of Cirrus, light areas, and bright areas on the brightest areas (accounting for 34%, 55%, and 85% of the associations, respectively); and of light areas and bright areas on Cirrus (accounting for 37% and 28%, respectively).ConclusionsIn a mammogram, the lighter (less dense) areas have a causal effect on the brightest (highly dense) areas, including through a causal pathway via textural features. These causal relationships help us gain insight into the relative aetiological importance of different mammographic features in breast cancer. For example our findings are consistent with the brightest areas being more aetiologically important than lighter areas for screen-detected breast cancer; conversely, light areas being more aetiologically important for interval breast cancer. Additionally, specific textural features capture aetiologically independent breast cancer risk information from dense areas. These findings highlight the utility of ICE FALCON and family data in decomposing the associations between intercorrelated disease biomarkers into distinct biological pathways.

What do women think about having received their breast cancer risk as part of a risk-stratified NHS Breast Screening Programme? A qualitative study

BackgroundRisk-stratified screening is being considered for national breast screening programmes. It is unclear how women experience risk-stratified screening and receipt of breast cancer risk information in real time. This study aimed to explore the psychological impact of undergoing risk-stratified screening within England’s NHS Breast Screening Programme.MethodsIndividual telephone interviews were conducted with 40 women who participated in the BC-Predict study and received a letter indicating their estimated breast cancer risk as one of four risk categories: low (<2% 10-year risk), average (2–4.99%), above average (moderate; 5–7.99%) or high (≥8%). Audio-recorded interview transcriptions were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.ResultsTwo themes were produced: ‘From risk expectations to what’s my future health story?’ highlights that women overall valued the opportunity to receive risk estimates; however, when these were discordant with perceived risk, this causes temporary distress or rejection of the information. ‘Being a good (woman) citizen’ where women felt positive contributing to society but may feel judged if they then cannot exert agency over the management of their risk or access follow-up supportConclusionsRisk-stratified breast screening was generally accepted without causing long-lasting distress; however, issues related to risk communication and access to care pathways need to be considered for implementation.

Quantifying the effects of risk-stratified breast cancer screening when delivered in real time as routine practice versus usual screening: the BC-Predict non-randomised controlled study (NCT04359420)

BackgroundRisk stratification as a routine part of the NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) could provide a better balance of benefits and harms. We developed BC-Predict, to offer women when invited to the NHSBSP, which collects standard risk factor information; mammographic density; and in a sub-sample, a Polygenic Risk Score (PRS).MethodsRisk prediction was estimated primarily from self-reported questionnaires and mammographic density using the Tyrer–Cuzick risk model. Women eligible for NHSBSP were recruited. BC-Predict produced risk feedback letters, inviting women at high risk (≥8% 10-year) or moderate risk (≥5–<8% 10-year) to have appointments to discuss prevention and additional screening.ResultsOverall uptake of BC-Predict in screening attendees was 16.9% with 2472 consenting to the study; 76.8% of those received risk feedback within the 8-week timeframe. Recruitment was 63.2% with an onsite recruiter and paper questionnaire compared to <10% with BC-Predict only (P < 0.0001). Risk appointment attendance was highest for those at high risk (40.6%); 77.5% of those opted for preventive medication.DiscussionWe have shown that a real-time offer of breast cancer risk information (including both mammographic density and PRS) is feasible and can be delivered in reasonable time, although uptake requires personal contact. Preventive medication uptake in women newly identified at high risk is high and could improve the cost-effectiveness of risk stratification.Trial registrationRetrospectively registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04359420).

Pakistani healthcare professionals’ perceptions of communication with patients and their relatives about hereditary breast cancer: a qualitative study in a LMIC

Pakistan has the highest incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer in Asia, with high numbers of patients diagnosed at a young age suggesting the possibility of an inherited cancer syndrome. Communication of hereditary breast cancer (HBC) risk information with patients could enable earlier detection of the condition in relatives and reduce mortality rates. This study aimed to explore perceptions of healthcare professionals (HCPs) in Pakistan about communication with patients and their relatives about HBC. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with eighteen HCPs during March to May 2020 in Lahore. Thematic analysis shows the HCPs were generally supportive of informing patients themselves about HBC, but believed it was the patients’ role to inform their relatives. HCPs also highlighted important barriers to communication with patients about HBC, including (i) patients’ low socioeconomic status and educational attainment; (ii) high prevalence of the social stigma of breast cancer; and (iii) lack of health resources and facilities to provide genetic testing for HBC. In conclusion, HCPs would value the development of interventions to support communication between HCPs and patients. They also highlighted the need for interventions to support intrafamilial communication about HBC. Much research and political support are needed to address patient, social, and systemic-level barriers to facilitate communication about HBC.

The co-development of personalised 10-year breast cancer risk communications: a ‘think-aloud’ study

BackgroundRisk stratified breast cancer screening is being considered as a means of improving the balance of benefits and harms of mammography. Stratified screening requires the communication of risk estimates. We aimed to co-develop personalised 10-year breast cancer risk communications for women attending routine mammography.MethodsWe conducted think-aloud interviews on prototype breast cancer risk letters and accompanying information leaflets with women receiving breast screening through the UK National Breast Screening Programme. Risk information was redesigned following feedback from 55 women in three iterations. A deductive thematic analysis of participants’ speech is presented.ResultsOverall, participants appreciated receiving their breast cancer risk. Their comments focused on positive framing and presentation of the risk estimate, a desire for detail on the contribution of individual risk factors to overall risk and effective risk management strategies, and clearly signposted support pathways.ConclusionProvision of breast cancer risk information should strive to be personal, understandable and meaningful. Risk information should be continually refined to reflect developments in risk management. Receipt of risk via letter is welcomed but concerns remain around the acceptability of informing women at higher risk in this way, highlighting a need for co-development of risk dissemination and support pathways.

Examining social class as it relates to heuristics women use to determine the trustworthiness of information regarding the link between alcohol and breast cancer risk

BackgroundHigh rates of alcohol consumption by midlife women, despite the documented risks associated with breast cancer, varies according to social class. However, we know little about how to develop equitable messaging regarding breast cancer prevention that takes into consideration class differences in the receipt and use of such information.ObjectiveTo explore the heuristics used by women with different (inequitable) life chances to determine the trustworthiness of information regarding alcohol as a modifiable risk factor for breast cancer risk.Methods and materialsInterviews were conducted with 50 midlife (aged 45–64) women living in South Australia, diversified by self-reported alcohol consumption and social class. Women were asked to describe where they sought health information, how they accessed information specific to breast cancer risk as it relates to alcohol, and how they determined whether (or not) such information was trustworthy. De-identified transcripts were analysed following a three-step progressive method with the aim of identifying how women of varying life chances determine the trustworthiness of alcohol and breast cancer risk information. Three heuristics were used by women: (1) consideration of whose interests are being served; (2) engagement with ‘common sense’; and (3) evaluating the credibility of the message and messenger. Embedded within each heuristic are notable class-based distinctions.ConclusionsMore equitable provision of cancer prevention messaging might consider how social class shapes the reception and acceptance of risk information. Class should be considered in the development and tailoring of messages as the trustworthiness of organizations behind public health messaging cannot be assumed.

The Clinical and Psychosocial Outcomes for Women Who Received Unexpected Clinically Actionable Germline Information Identified through Research: An Exploratory Sequential Mixed-Methods Comparative Study.

Background Research identifying and returning clinically actionable germline variants offer a new avenue of access to genetic information. The psychosocial and clinical outcomes for women who have received this ‘genome-first care’ delivering hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk information outside of clinical genetics services are unknown. Methods: An exploratory sequential mixed-methods case-control study compared outcomes between women who did (cases; group 1) and did not (controls; group 2) receive clinically actionable genetic information from a research cohort in Victoria, Australia. Participants completed an online survey examining cancer risk perception and worry, and group 1 also completed distress and adaptation measures. Group 1 participants subsequently completed a semi structured interview. Results: Forty-five participants (group 1) and 96 (group 2) completed the online survey, and 31 group 1 participants were interviewed. There were no demographic differences between groups 1 and 2, although more of group 1 participants had children (p = 0.03). Group 1 reported significantly higher breast cancer risk perception (p < 0.001) compared to group 2, and higher cancer worry than group 2 (p < 0.001). Some group 1 participants described how receiving their genetic information heightened their cancer risk perception and exacerbated their cancer worry while waiting for risk-reducing surgery. Group 1 participants reported a MICRA mean score of 27.4 (SD 11.8, range 9–56; possible range 0–95), and an adaptation score of 2.9 (SD = 1.1). Conclusion: There were no adverse psychological outcomes amongst women who received clinically actionable germline information through a model of ‘genome-first’ care compared to those who did not. These findings support the return of clinically actionable research results to research participants.

Women\u2019s health behaviour change after receiving breast cancer risk estimates with tailored screening and prevention recommendations

BackgroundThe Predicting Risk of Cancer at Screening (PROCAS) study provided women who were eligible for breast cancer screening in Greater Manchester (United Kingdom) with their 10-year risk of breast cancer, i.e., low (≤1.5%), average (1.5–4.99%), moderate (5.-7.99%) or high (≥8%). The aim of this study is to explore which factors were associated with women’s uptake of screening and prevention recommendations. Additionally, we evaluated women’s organisational preferences regarding tailored screening.MethodsA total of 325 women with a self-reported low (n = 60), average (n = 125), moderate (n = 80), or high (n = 60) risk completed a two-part web-based survey. The first part contained questions about personal characteristics. For the second part women were asked about uptake of early detection and preventive behaviours after breast cancer risk communication. Additional questions were posed to explore preferences regarding the organisation of risk-stratified screening and prevention. We performed exploratory univariable and multivariable regression analyses to assess which factors were associated with uptake of primary and secondary breast cancer preventive behaviours, stratified by breast cancer risk. Organisational preferences are presented using descriptive statistics.ResultsSelf-reported breast cancer risk predicted uptake of (a) supplemental screening and breast self-examination, (b) risk-reducing medication and (c) preventive lifestyle behaviours. Further predictors were (a) having a first degree relative with breast cancer, (b) higher age, and (c) higher body mass index (BMI). Women’s organisational preferences for tailored screening emphasised a desire for more intensive screening for women at increased risk by further shortening the screening interval and moving the starting age forward.ConclusionsBreast cancer risk communication predicts the uptake of key tailored primary and secondary preventive behaviours. Effective communication of breast cancer risk information is essential to optimise the population-wide impact of tailored screening.

Updates in Molecular Breast Imaging

Molecular breast imaging (MBI) is a nuclear medicine study performed with dedicated gamma camera systems optimized to image the uptake of Tc-99m sestamibi in the breast. MBI provides a relatively low-cost and simple functional breast imaging method that can identify breast cancers obscured by dense fibroglandular tissue on mammography. Recent studies have also found that background levels of uptake in benign dense tissue may provide breast cancer risk information. This article discusses the latest updates in MBI technology, recent evidence supporting its clinical use, and work in progress that may aid in wider adoption of MBI.

Patients included at CAPO/IPOS World Congress of Psycho-Oncology 2019. Reflections from the invited advocates

Patients included at CAPO/IPOS World Congress of Psycho-Oncology 2019. Reflections from the invited advocates

Using Tablets to Collect Breast Cancer Risk Information in an Underserved Population

The authors tested the use of tablets to collect breast cancer risk data and compared the approach against paper-based scantrons. The goal was to examine the usability of digital technology for data collection in underserved populations. A total of 340 individuals were randomized to answer a breast health survey via either tablets (170) or paper forms (170). Post questionnaire surveys were conducted to evaluate the usability of tablets. Outcomes included completion time, satisfaction, and the numbers and types of questions raised by patients during the survey. There was no significant difference in questionnaire completion time between two groups (12.5 vs. 12.1 minutes, p = 0.07). The tablet group was more satisfied with the experience (p &lt; 0.001). Low health literacy women spent more time on the questionnaire (p &lt; 0.05). Electronic devices can be utilized to collect breast cancer risk data in underserved, ethnically diverse populations. Future healthcare questionnaire applications should focus on accessibility improvements for these populations.

Understanding the response of mammography facilities to breast density notification.

State-specific breast density notification legislation requires that women undergoing mammography be informed about breast density, with variation among states. Because mammography facilities are among the main points of contact for women undergoing mammography, research is needed to understand how facilities communicate information on breast density, cancer risk, and supplemental screening to women. A cross-sectional, 50-item, mailed survey of 156 American College of Radiology-certified mammography facilities in North Carolina was conducted in 2017 via the Tailored Design Method. Breast density notification practices, supplemental screening services, and patient educational materials were compared by supplemental screening availability via t tests and chi-square tests. All responding facilities (n=94; 60.3% response rate) notified women of their breast density in the mammography results letter. Breast cancer risk assessments were performed by 36.2% of the facilities, with risk information communicated in the final radiology report for the referring provider to discuss with the woman (79.4%) or in the results letter (58.8%). Supplemental breast cancer screening was offered by 63.8% of the facilities, with use based on multiple factors, including recommendations from the referring physician (63.3%) or reading radiologist (63.3%), breast density (48.3%), other risk factors (48.3%), and patient request (40.0%). Although 75.0% of the facilities offered breast density educational materials, only 36.6% offered educational materials on supplemental screening. In a state with a breast density notification law, mammography facilities communicate breast density, cancer risk, and supplemental screening information to women through various approaches. When supplemental screening is offered, facilities use multiple decision-making criteria rather than breast density alone.

Women's responses and understanding of polygenic breast cancer risk information.

It is estimated that polygenic factors can explain up to 18% of familial breast cancer. Clinical implementation of polygenic testing has begun, with several commercial laboratories now testing. Despite commercial implementation, there is little research investigating how women respond and understand polygenic risk information. This study aimed to explore women's experience receiving their personalised polygenic risk score (PRS) and compare responses of women at different levels of polygenic risk. Eligible participants were affected and unaffected women from families clinically assessed to be at high risk for breast cancer who had received their personalised PRS as part of the Variants in Practice Psychosocial Study (ViPPs). In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 women (mean age 53.4years) up to four weeks after receiving their PRS. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Eleven women received a PRS that was in the top quartile of PRS distribution and 10 in the lowest quartile. Women's lived experience with breast cancer informed how they responded to their PRS, constructed and made sense of breast cancer risk following receipt of their PRS, and integrated this new information into their breast cancer risk management. Regardless of polygenic risk level, all participants demonstrated broad knowledge of concepts related to polygenic information and were able to accurately describe the implications of their PRS. Receiving PRS did not appear to negatively impact women's reported distress levels. Our findings suggest polygenic breast cancer information is well received and understood by women at high-risk for breast cancer.

The introduction of risk stratified screening into the NHS breast screening Programme: views from British-Pakistani women

BackgroundUK national guidelines suggest women at high-risk of breast cancer should be offered more frequent screening or preventative medications. Currently, only 1 in 6 high-risk women are identified. One route to identify more high-risk women is via multifactorial risk assessment as part of the UK’s NHS Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP). As lower socioeconomic and minority ethnic populations continue to experience barriers to screening, it is important that any new service does not exacerbate issues further. To inform service development, this study explored views of women from underserved backgrounds regarding the introduction of risk stratification into the NHSBSP.MethodsNineteen semi-structured interviews were conducted with British-Pakistani women from low socioeconomic backgrounds from East Lancashire, UK. Fourteen interviews were conducted via an interpreter.ResultsThematic analysis produced three themes. Attitudes toward risk awareness concerns the positive views women have toward the idea of receiving personalised breast cancer risk information. Anticipated barriers to accessibility emphasises the difficulties associated with women’s limited English skills for accessing information, and their I.T proficiency for completing an online risk assessment questionnaire. Acceptability of risk communication strategy highlights the diversity of opinion regarding the suitability of receiving risk results via letter, with the option for support from a healthcare professional deemed essential.ConclusionsThe idea of risk stratification was favourable amongst this underserved community. To avoid exacerbating inequities, this new service should provide information in multiple languages and modalities and offer women the opportunity to speak to a healthcare professional about risk. This service should also enable completion of personal risk information via paper questionnaires, as well as online.

Abstract OT3-15-01: Pilot of lifestyle InterventiON to reducE brEast cancer Risk (PIONEER): A randomised study

Abstract Background: Breast cancer causes more deaths than any other medical condition in women aged 30-50 years in the UK. Around 23% of breast cancers are preventable, yet many women are unaware of the modifiable risk factors. Risk factors for breast cancer can be broadly divided into fixed: family history of breast cancer and genetic factors, mammographic breast density, benign proliferative breast disease, hormonal and reproductive risk factors, and modifiable lifestyle factors such as increased weight, decreased physical activity and alcohol consumption. The latter are the focus of this study. Trial Design In this feasibility study women who have attended a symptomatic clinic and do not have cancer will be randomised into three intervention arms (see below) with a further 2-way randomisation to single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) testing (or not). All women will be told their estimated breast cancer risk as calculated by the Tyrer-Cuzick model. Women will be asked to set goals related to behaviour change. The primary end point is whether these goals have been met. Goal setting, information and changes are mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel model. Eligibility criteria FemaleAge 30 - 60 yearsAttending the symptomatic breast clinic at our facilityBenign or normal diagnosisAgree to receive their personalised breast cancer riskAvailable to participate in a 1 year risk reduction programme NOTE: after risk assessment, women with a less than population risk of breast cancer will be excluded from participating in the behavioural change elements. Specific aims To assess which of the interventions is most suitable to take forward into a large-scale study based on acceptability, impact on behaviour and scalability. This will give useful guidance to the future development of a national study with the aim of a meaningful reduction in breast cancer risk. Trial arms Standard breast cancer risk information book (control)Website with information and bespoke goal-setting exerciseWebsite as above + group coaching Standard breast cancer risk information book (control) Website with information and bespoke goal-setting exercise Website as above + group coaching 2-way randomisation to SNP testing or not for each arm, hence 6 possibilities Statistical methods Population: 240 participants who were randomised and did not withdraw following their randomisation allocation (per-protocol analysis). The reason is in this feasibility study we are most interested in the effect of different interventions on those who actually participate in the study. Secondary analyses will include an intention-to-treat basis using everyone randomised. Exploratory analyses to adjust for non-compliance will also be undertaken. Comparisons The main comparisons of interest are between the control and intervention arms, in particular the proportion achieving their goal. Mean change in weight, alcohol intake and physical activity will also be assessed. Further comparisons will be by SNP testing group. Secondary comparisons are as follows: Acceptability of study - proportion of women approached who consentAcceptability of randomisation - proportion of women who withdraw after randomisationImpact of SNP testing - mean change and proportion of women who achieve goal in the SNP testing and no SNP testing groupsEfficacy - mean change in each modifiable risk factor in each of the intervention groupsCancer-related anxiety - mean change in score for cancer anxiety at 12 months by SNP testing and intervention group and correlation between initial score and change in risk-factorsRetention - proportion of women who complete their end of study questionnaire, according to study groupChemoprevention - proportion of women in the high and moderate risk groups taking endocrine therapy at one year according to study groupScalability - estimate of cost per participant Accrual None to date. Recruitment of 240 women will start in September 2019. Contact Pioneer.study@nhs.net Citation Format: Rebekah SL Law, Carol Pitches, Katherine Krupa, Adam Brentnall, Jennifer Rusby. Pilot of lifestyle InterventiON to reducE brEast cancer Risk (PIONEER): A randomised study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr OT3-15-01.

Characteristics Associated with Participation in ENGAGED 2 - A Web-based Breast Cancer Risk Communication and Decision Support Trial.

We evaluated demographic and clinical characteristics associated with participation in a clinical trial testing the efficacy of an online tool to support breast cancer risk communication and decision support for risk mitigation to determine the generalizability of trial results. Eligible women were members of Kaiser Permanente Washington aged 40-69 years with a recent normal screening mammogram, heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts and a calculated risk of > 1.67% based on the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium 5-year breast cancer risk model. Trial outcomes were chemoprevention and breast magnetic resonance imaging by 12-months post-baseline. Women were recruited via mail with phone follow-up using plain language materials notifying them of their density status and higher than average breast cancer risk. Multivariable logistic regression calculated independent odds ratios (ORs) for associations between demographic and clinical characteristics with trial participation. Of 2,569 eligible women contacted, 995 (38.7%) participated. Women with some college (OR = 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-2.96) or college degree (OR = 3.35, 95% CI 2.29-4.90) were more likely to participate than high school-educated women. Race/ethnicity also was associated with participation (African-American OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87; Asian OR = 0.22, 95% CI 0.12-0.41). Multivariate adjusted ORs for family history of breast/ovarian cancer were not associated with trial participation. Use of plain language and potential access to a website providing personal breast cancer risk information and education were insufficient in achieving representative participation in a breast cancer prevention trial. Additional methods of targeting and tailoring, potentially facilitated by clinical and community outreach, are needed to facilitate equitable engagement for all women.

Breast cancer risk status influences uptake, retention and efficacy of a weight loss programme amongst breast cancer screening attendees: two randomised controlled feasibility trials

BackgroundExcess body weight and sub-optimal lifestyle are modifiable causes of breast cancer and other diseases. There is little evidence that behaviour change is possible within screening programmes and whether this is influenced by prior knowledge of disease risk. We determined whether breast cancer risk influences uptake, retention and efficacy of a weight control programme in the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme, and whether additional cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes risk information improves uptake and retention further.MethodOverweight/obese women in the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme identified at high, moderately increased, average and low-risk of breast cancer were randomised to receive individualised breast cancer risk information (breast cancer prevention programme), or individualised breast cancer, cardiovascular disease (QRISK2) and type 2 diabetes (QDiabetes, HbA1c) information (multiple disease prevention programme). Personalised breast cancer risk feedback was given before randomisation in Study-1, and after randomisation in Study-2.ResultsRecruitment was 9% (126/1356) in Study-1 and 7% (52/738) in Study-2. With respect to breast cancer risk, odds ratio of uptake for high/moderately increased vs low risk women was 1.99 (95% CI 1.24–3.17, P = 0.004) in Study-1 and 3.58 (95% CI 1.59–8.07, P = 0.002) in Study-2. Odds ratio of retention for high/moderately increased -risk vs. low risk women was 2.98 (95% CI 1.05–8.47, P = 0.041) in Study-1 and 3.88 (95% CI 1.07–14.04, P = 0.039) in Study-2. Weight loss of ≥5% at 12 months was achieved by 63% high/moderate vs. 43% low-risk women in Study-1 (P = 0.083) and 39% vs. 8% in Study-2 (P = 0.008). Uptake, retention and weight loss were equivalent in both the breast cancer prevention programme and the multiple disease prevention programme in both studies.ConclusionsWomen who are informed that they are at increased breast cancer risk were significantly more likely to join and remain in the programmes and consequently lose more weight across both studies. High risk women are more likely engage in a lifetyle prevention programme and also have the greatest potential benefit fom risk reduction strategies.Trial registrationISRCTN91372184 Registered 28 September 2014.

Partnering With Mommy Bloggers to Disseminate Breast Cancer Risk Information: Social Media Intervention.

BackgroundWomen are concerned about reducing their breast cancer risk, particularly if they have daughters. Social media platforms, such as blogs written by mothers, are increasingly being recognized as a channel that women use to make personal and family health–related decisions. Government initiatives (eg, Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Coordinating Committee) and researchers have called for scientists and the community to partner and disseminate scientifically and community-informed environmental risk information.ObjectiveWe developed and evaluated a blog intervention to disseminate breast cancer and environmental risk information to mothers. We teamed with mommy bloggers to disseminate a message that we developed and tailored for mothers and daughters based on scientific evidence from the Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Program (BCERP). We posited that the intervention would influence women’s exposure to, acceptance of, and beliefs about environmental risks while promoting their intention to adopt risk-reducing behaviors.MethodsUsing a quasi-experimental design, we recruited 75 mommy bloggers to disseminate the breast cancer risk message on their respective blogs and examined the impact of the intervention on (1) readers exposed to the intervention (n=445) and (2) readers not exposed to the intervention (comparison group; n=353).ResultsFollowing the intervention, blog reader scores indicating exposure to the breast cancer risk and prevention information were greater than scores of blog readers who were not exposed (or did not recall seeing the message; mean 3.92, SD 0.85 and mean 3.45, SD 0.92, respectively; P<.001). Readers who recalled the intervention messages also had higher breast cancer risk and prevention information satisfaction scores compared with readers who did not see (or recall) the messages (mean 3.97, SD 0.75 and mean 3.57, SD 0.94, respectively; P<.001). Blog readers who recalled seeing the intervention messages were significantly more likely to share the breast cancer risk and prevention information they read, with their daughters specifically, than readers who did not recall seeing them (χ21=8.1; P=.004). Those who recalled seeing the intervention messages reported significantly higher breast cancer risk and prevention information influence scores, indicative of behavioral intentions, than participants who did not recall seeing them (mean 11.22, SD 2.93 and mean 10.14, SD 3.24, respectively; P=.003). Most women ranked Facebook as their first choice for receiving breast cancer risk information.ConclusionsResults indicated that blog readers who were exposed to (and specifically recalled) the BCERP-adapted intervention messages from mommy bloggers had higher breast cancer risk and prevention information exposure scores and higher breast cancer risk and prevention information satisfaction and influence scores than those who did not see (or recall) them. Mommy bloggers may be important opinion leaders for some women and key to enhancing the messaging, delivery, and impact of environmental breast cancer risk information on mothers.