Preventive Services Task Force Research Articles

Pack-Year Smoking History: An Inadequate and Biased Measure to Determine Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility.

Pack-year smoking history is an imperfect and biased measure of cumulative tobacco exposure. The use of pack-year smoking history to determine lung cancer screening eligibility in the current US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guideline may unintentionally exclude many high-risk individuals, especially those from racial and ethnic minority groups. It is unclear whether using a smoking duration cutoff instead of a smoking pack-year cutoff would improve the selection of individuals for screening. We analyzed 49,703 individuals with a smoking history from the Southern Community Cohort Study (SCCS) and 22,126 individuals with a smoking history from the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS) to assess eligibility for screening under the USPSTF guideline versus a proposed guideline that replaces the ≥20-pack-year criterion with a ≥20-year smoking duration criterion. Under the USPSTF guideline, only 57.6% of Black patients with lung cancer in the SCCS would have qualified for screening, whereas a significantly higher percentage of White patients with lung cancer (74.0%) would have qualified (P < .001). Under the proposed guideline, the percentage of Black and White patients with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening increased to 85.3% and 82.0%, respectively, eradicating the disparity in screening eligibility between the groups. In the BWHS, using a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff increased the percentage of Black women with lung cancer who would have qualified for screening from 42.5% to 63.8%. Use of a 20-year smoking duration cutoff instead of a 20-pack-year cutoff greatly increases the proportion of patients with lung cancer who would qualify for screening and eliminates the racial disparity in screening eligibility between Black versus White individuals; smoking duration has the added benefit of being easier to calculate and being a more precise assessment of smoking exposure compared with pack-year smoking history.

Prevalence and predictors of colon and prostate cancer screening among volunteer firefighters: The United States Firefighter Cancer Assessment and Prevention Study.

Although firefighters have increased risk for colon and prostate cancer, limited information exists on screening practices for these cancers in volunteer firefighters who compose two-thirds of the US fire service. We estimated the prevalence of colon and prostate cancer screening among volunteer firefighters using eligibility criteria from 4 evidence-based screening recommendations and evaluated factors influencing screening. We evaluated colon (n = 569) and prostate (n = 498) cancer screening prevalence in a sample of US volunteer firefighters using eligibility criteria from the US Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF), National Fire Protection Association, American Cancer Society, and National Comprehensive Cancer Network. We assessed associations with fire service experience, demographics, and cancer risk perception based on USPSTF guidelines. For those eligible based on USPSTF guidelines, colon and prostate cancer screening prevalence was 51.7% (95% CI: 45.7, 57.8) and 48.8% (95% CI: 40.0, 57.6), respectively. Higher odds of colon and prostate cancer screening were observed with older age and with some college education compared to those with less education. Fire service experience and cancer risk perception were not associated with screening practices. This is the first large study to assess colon and prostate cancer screening among US volunteer firefighters based on different screening guidelines. Our findings suggest gaps in cancer prevention efforts in the US volunteer fire service. Promoting cancer screening education and opportunities for volunteer firefighters by their fire departments, healthcare professionals, and public health practitioners, may help to address the gaps.

Harnessing Opportunity: Pilot Intervention to Improve Lung Cancer Screening for Women Undergoing Breast Screening Mammography

IntroductionThe screening mammogram could be a “teachable moment” to improve lung cancer screening (LCS) uptake. The aim of our project was to combine patient self-referral with eligibility identification by providers as a two-pronged approach to increase rates of LCS among eligible women. MethodsLCS education materials were created to stimulate patient education and encourage self-referral. Chart review of patients scheduled for screening mammography was performed to identify patients who met LCS criteria. The primary outcome was rate of acceptance of targeted interventions as measured by qualitative survey material and rate of LCS uptake. ResultsBetween August 2022 and August 2023, 116 patients were identified by providers for potential eligibility for LCS and 34 patients (29.3%) deemed eligible based on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force 2021 guidelines. There were 19 patients (56%) who completed LCS with three patients (16%) with screen-detected nodules that led to further workup. Post-implementation qualitative survey results reveal that 100% of the participants rated their shared decision-making visit experience as “very helpful” and 67% responded “very likely” to seek simultaneous breast and LCS in the future. Informational materials were rated as 80% favorable among all respondents; however, the rate of self-referral alone was 0%. The combined rates of eligible patients lost to follow-up or refusal was 24%. ConclusionThe self-referral aspect of the intervention revealed that patients are unlikely to self-refer for LCS. Nevertheless, patients undergoing screening mammograms individually identified for LCS were very responsive to learning more about dual screening.

Multi-Pronged Solutions Addressing Barriers to Breast Screening Access in Appalachia

&lt;i&gt;Annual mammography screening is recommended by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) and American Cancer Society (ACS) to reduce mortality through early detection of breast cancer. In rural Appalachia, rates of later-stage breast cancer incidence and mortality are higher than national averages. We explored the ways that providers and staff at breast cancer screening facilities employed novel approaches to overcome patient- and facility-level barriers to access to breast cancer screening in the Appalachian region. We conducted 23 semi-structured interviews with 28 clinical providers and staff of breast health facilities in Appalachia. Themes reflect how limiting features of breast screening facilities influenced access to care; the way patient-level barriers presented challenges to access to breast screening; and that external and regulatory forces presented obstacles to access to care. In addition, the unique geographical and geographical attributes of the Appalachian region shaped access and adherence to mammography screening recommendations. Thematic findings highlight that facilities implemented patient-centered strategies to overcome access-related barriers. Results may inform the ways breast cancer screening facilities address suboptimal access to breast health screening. They may also inform future resource allocations to enable facilities to reach breast cancer screening performance goals.&lt;/i&gt;

Pacific Spine and Pain Society (PSPS) Evidence Review of Surgical Treatments for Lumbar Degenerative Spinal Disease: A Narrative Review.

Interventional treatment options for the lumbar degenerative spine have undergone a significant amount of innovation over the last decade. As new technologies emerge, along with the surgical specialty expansion, there is no manuscript that utilizes a review of surgical treatments with evidence rankings from multiple specialties, namely, the interventional pain and spine communities. Through the Pacific Spine and Pain Society (PSPS), the purpose of this manuscript is to provide a balanced evidence review of available surgical treatments. The PSPS Research Committee created a working group that performed a comprehensive literature search on available surgical technologies for the treatment of the degenerative spine, utilizing the ranking assessment based on USPSTF (United States Preventative Services Taskforce) and NASS (North American Spine Society) criteria. The surgical treatments were separated based on disease process, including treatments for degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis, and spinal stenosis. There is emerging and significant evidence to support multiple approaches to treat the symptomatic lumbar degenerative spine. As new technologies become available, training, education, credentialing, and peer review are essential for optimizing patient safety and successful outcomes.

Abstract 3474: Racial disparities in receipt of surveillance mammography after breast cancer diagnosis

Abstract Background: The 5-year survival rate for breast cancer (BC) stands at an estimated 91%, with approximately 3.8 million BC survivors in the U.S. This large population of breast cancer survivors remains at risk of loco-regional recurrence, with variations noted across racial groups. White survivors face a locoregional breast cancer recurrence rate of 1.8%, whereas Black, Asian, and Hispanic survivors experience higher rates of 3.9%, 3.6%, and 3.1%, respectively. Notably, Black BC survivors with recurrent breast cancer exhibit a median survival time of 1.8 years compared with 3.6 years observed for White BC survivors. Current recommendations from the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force and the American College of Radiology advocate for surveillance through annual mammography and routine clinical visits following breast-conserving surgery and lumpectomies. However, there are gaps in the data available regarding disparities in the utilization of surveillance mammography by race/ethnicity. Thus, the goal of this study is to estimate race/ethnic disparities in surveillance mammography utilization and its impact on survival among breast cancer survivors at a large comprehensive cancer center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of female breast cancer survivors ≥19 years diagnosed and/or treated at the Duke Cancer Institute (DCI) between 2014 and 2022 was conducted. Data was abstracted on patient socio-demographics, cancer type (invasive ductal and ductal in situ carcinomas) and utilization of surveillance mammography within 2-5 years post initial breast cancer diagnosis. Chi-squared testing will be used to analyze rates of mammography surveillance receipt among different races presenting with BC at DCI. Kaplan-Meier estimates will be used for analysis on survival. Results: A total of 10,904 women with a mean age of 43.7 years were included in the study. The study cohort is comprised of 69% non-Hispanic (NH) White, 24% NH Black, 2.2% Hispanic, 0.5% NH Native American, 1% NH other, and 3.2% NH Asian women. There were 1,791 cases of ductal in situ carcinomas and 9,113 invasive ductal carcinoma cases. NH Black women had the lowest 5-year relative survival rate (81.5%) of all represented racial groups: NH White 89.1%, Hispanic 95.3%, NH Native 87.8%, Asian 97.9%, and NH Other 88.0%. Ongoing analysis will be completed to estimate disparities in the use of post-treatment surveillance mammography amongst breast cancer survivors. Conclusions: This study will inform efforts to increase post-treatment surveillance and improve adherence to survivorship guidelines with the ultimate goal of reducing mortality disparities among breast cancer survivors. Citation Format: Jasmine G. Wilkerson, Frances Wang, Yadurshini Raveendran, Tomi Akinyemiju. Racial disparities in receipt of surveillance mammography after breast cancer diagnosis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 3474.

Abstract 4786: Colorectal cancer screening rates among deaf, deafblind, and hard of hearing adults aged 45 to 75 years old

Abstract Background: Deaf, deafblind, and hard of hearing (DDBHH) individuals who use American Sign Language (ASL), a subpopulation of the disability, experience disparities concerning cancer screening and cancer-related health outcomes. For this study, we explored colorectal cancer screening rates among DDBHH survey respondents in comparison to rates found in the hearing population. Materials and Methods: Using the National Cancer Institute Health Information National Trends Survey in ASL (Kushalnagar et al., 2015), we surveyed participants 18+ years old using the Center for Deaf Health Equity at Gallaudet University’s database of over 2,500 DDBHH participants from all over the USA, including Hawaii and Puerto Rico. We used the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines’ age cutoffs to assess adherence to colorectal cancer screenings. Results: Survey response rate within three weeks of mail out in July 2023 was 12%. A total of 405 DDBHH adult participants answered screening questions for colorectal cancer in ASL and English. Overall, 43.7% self-reported screening adherence for age-eligible (45-75 years) colorectal cancer screening; 54.7% reported never having a colorectal cancer screening. Similarly-aged hearing adults reported 58.7% adherence in the English version of the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Discussion: With the 43.7% adherence rate, the DDBHH community is lagging behind colorectal cancer screenings compared to the general population of hearing adults. Estimating the colorectal cancer screening rates among the DBHH community and understanding the reasons for these existing disparities is important to achieve screening adherence of 68.3%, the target set by the Healthy People 2030. Such research will aid the Center for Deaf Health Equity to actively work with the community to improve strategies to increase colorectal cancer screening. Citation Format: Regina M. Wang, Sowmya R. Rao, Erika J. Bergeron, Emmanuel C. Perrodin-Njoku, Poorna Kushalnagar. Colorectal cancer screening rates among deaf, deafblind, and hard of hearing adults aged 45 to 75 years old [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 4786.

Abstract 4803: Cancer screening, knowledge, and fatalism among Chinese, Korean, and South Asian residents of New York City

Abstract Background: Asian New York City (NYC) residents have the lowest screening rates by race across cancer type. Past studies indicate heterogeneity within the Asian American population, yet few have examined differences in screening uptake and related factors among Asian ethnic subgroups in NYC. Further, cancer screening knowledge and cancer fatalism have been found to impact cancer screening uptake, and effects vary by race, ethnicity, immigration status, and cancer type. Objective: Our study aimed to examine differences in cancer screening uptake, knowledge, and fatalism among Chinese, Korean, and South Asian NYC adults and to examine the effects of cancer screening knowledge and cancer fatalism on cancer screening uptake. Methods: We used data from NYU Langone Perlmutter Cancer Center’s Cancer Community Health Resources and Needs Assessment survey. The survey was developed and distributed in 10 languages in collaboration with 23 community partners. Data were collected from NYC adults with recruitment strategies focused on immigrant and non-English language preference communities from Oct. 2021 - Dec. 2022. Multivariable logistic and multinomial regression analyses were used to examine differences in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake; breast and CRC screening knowledge; and cancer fatalism between Chinese, Korean, and South Asian (Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Asian Indian, and Nepali) adults; and to examine the effects of breast and CRC screening knowledge on breast and CRC screening uptake and cancer fatalism on breast, cervical, and CRC screening uptake (n=1,045). Analyses were restricted by age and sex using United States (U.S.) Preventive Services Task Force guidelines. Results: The sample was 60.0% female with a mean age of 45.7 years; 83.1% of participants were born outside of the U.S., 49.9% of participants were Chinese, 22.8% were Korean, and 27.3% were South Asian. Korean women had 0.52 (95%CI: 0.31, 0.88) times lower odds of Pap test uptake than Chinese women; South Asian adults had 0.44 (95%CI: 0.24, 0.80) times lower odds of CRC screening uptake than Chinese adults. Korean adults had 1.68 (95%CI: 1.17, 2.41) times higher odds of knowing the correct age to begin having mammograms compared to Chinese adults; South Asian adults had 0.66 (95%CI: 0.46, 0.94) times lower odds of knowing the correct age to begin CRC screening compared to Chinese adults. Korean adults had a 0.39 (95%CI: 0.25, 0.63) and 0.22 (95%CI: 0.13, 0.37) times lower odds of some and high cancer fatalism, respectively, compared to Chinese adults. No associations were found between cancer screening knowledge or cancer fatalism and cancer screening uptake. Conclusions: Our study adds to the current literature on the diversity of cancer needs, beliefs, and behaviors among Asian Americans. The findings indicate the need for ethnic-specific cultural tailoring for future cancer screening interventions. Citation Format: Isabel I. Curro, Chloe A. Teasdale, Laura Wyatt, Yousra Yusuf, Victoria Foster, Sonia Sifuentes, Perla Chebli, Julie A. Kranick, Simona C. Kwon, Chau Trinh-Shevrin, Madison N. LeCroy. Cancer screening, knowledge, and fatalism among Chinese, Korean, and South Asian residents of New York City [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 4803.

Abstract 4796: Improving cancer screening performance for women with dense breast tissue

Abstract Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the United States. To reduce mortality, screening by mammography in females is recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force, successfully reducing mortality by 15 - 32% in women aged 40 - 69 years. This is partially due to the high compliance rate (60 - 80%) among the candidate population. Mammography increases early-stage disease detection, which is correlated with better outcomes. While mammography has been largely successful, this screening method has limitations. Overall, mammography has false-negative and false-positive rates estimated at 12 - 20% and 7 - 12%, respectively. Consequently, annual mammograms result in 50 - 60% of women having a false-positive result within a 10-year span. Additionally, high breast density, found in approximately 50% of females over the age of 40, increases susceptibility to false positive and negative results. For this reason, in 2023 the FDA required that dense breast tissue status, an independent risk factor for cancer, be disclosed to mammogram recipients. The subsequent diagnostic pathway for women with dense breast tissue is not well defined for the care provider. Alternative imaging options have performance issues or are less accessible. Here we describe a liquid biopsy test to complement mammography in women with dense breast tissue to help resolve ambiguity in results. Blood from early- and late-stage breast cancer patients was prospectively collected in Streck cfDNA BCT Devices (n=100) or retrospectively acquired (n=100); and blood from presumed normal samples was collected (n=200). cfDNA was extracted and converted into libraries for low-pass whole genome sequencing (LP-WGS). Sequenced reads were analyzed to generate fragment end-motif and size (FEMS) and fragment coverage dataframes for classification using Genece Health’s proprietary analysis pipeline and machine-learning (ML) algorithm. 150 breast cancer samples distributed across stages and 150 presumed normal samples were selected to create a training cohort. Performance was tested using a 5-fold cross validation strategy. The best performance was observed using a convolution neural network (CNN) ML model with &amp;gt;80% sensitivity when specificity was set at 85%. The remaining 50 breast cancer samples and 50 presumed normal samples were used as an external test set. The performance in this cohort was comparable to the training cohort, with both specificity and sensitivity &amp;gt;80%. Genece presents an early proof of concept breast cancer screening liquid biopsy assay that uses LP-WGS fragmentomics and ML to detect cancer from a single blood sample. Continuing development with additional cohorts and optimization will yield even greater performance. The Genece liquid biopsy test has the potential to be paired with mammography, especially in women with dense breast tissue, to improve screening sensitivity, specificity, and overall outcomes. Citation Format: Molly Smith, Mengchi Wang, Andrew Carson, Byung In Lee, Michael Salmans, Bryan Leatham. Improving cancer screening performance for women with dense breast tissue [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2024; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2024 Apr 5-10; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(6_Suppl):Abstract nr 4796.

Revisiting the lung cancer screening eligibility criteria to promote equity for Black individuals

BackgroundEarly detection using low-dose computed tomography reduces lung-cancer-specific mortality by 20% among high-risk individuals. Blacks are less likely than Whites to meet lung cancer screening (LCS) criteria under both the former and the updated United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines. The purpose of this study was to assess racial disparities in LCS eligibility and to propose tailored eligibility criteria for Blacks to enable equitable screening rate between Whites and Blacks. MethodsData for this study were obtained from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (2017–2021). 101,552 subjects were included in the final analysis. By employing a systematic approach, we sought cut-off points at which Blacks were equally likely as Whites to be eligible for LCS. We evaluated the minimum age and smoking pack-years for Blacks while we retained the 2021 USPSTF criteria for Whites. The final decision was based on the minimum Wald’s Chi-square statistics. ResultsThe model we employed identified cut-off points at which Blacks were equally likely as Whites to be eligible for LCS. Retaining the 2021 USPSTF criteria for Whites, the model discovered a new pair of points for Blacks by reducing the minimum age to 43 years and decreasing the cumulative number of cigarettes smoked to 15 pack-years. Based on these cut-off points, we created tailored criteria for Blacks. Under the tailored criteria, Blacks (OR: 1.00; 95 %CI: 0.88–1.14) had the same odds of eligibility for LCS as Whites. The odds of eligibility for LCS by sex under the tailored criteria did not differ significantly for Black men (OR: 1.02; 95 %CI: 0.85–1.24) and Black women (OR: 0.95; 95 %CI: 0.81–1.12) compared to their respective White counterparts. ConclusionsThese tailored criteria for Blacks eliminate the disparities between Blacks and Whites in LCS eligibility. Future studies should test the sensitivity and specificity of these tailored criteria.

Understanding the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos: A qualitative study.

Rates of lung cancer screening among Latinos remain low. The purpose of the study was to understand the perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action for lung cancer screening among Latinos. Participants (N=20) were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. Eligibility criteria included: 1) self-identified as Hispanic/Latino, 2) spoke English and/or Spanish, and 3) met the USA Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for lung cancer screening. Interviews were conducted in Spanish and English, audio recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Using the health belief model, a qualitative theoretical analysis was used to analyze the interviews. Participants' mean age was 58.3 years old (SD=5.8), half of the participants were female, 55% had completed high school or lower educational level, and 55% reported speaking more Spanish than English. All participants were currently smoking. Fourteen participants (70%) were unaware of lung cancer screening, and eighteen (90%) did not know they were eligible for lung cancer screening. Regarding lung cancer screening, participants reported multiple perceived benefits (e.g., smoking cessation, early detection of lung cancer, increased survivorship) and barriers (e.g., fear of outcomes, cost, lung cancer screening not being recommended by their clinician). Lastly, multiple cues to actions for lung cancer screening were identified (e.g., family as a cue to action for getting screened). Most Latinos who were eligible for lung cancer screening were unaware of it and, when informed, they reported multiple perceived benefits, barriers, and cues to action. These factors provide concrete operational strategies to address lung cancer screening among Latinos.

Consequences of receiving weight-related advice from a healthcare provider: Understanding the varied experiences of people with higher weight

Healthcare providers regularly give weight-related advice (e.g., behavioral weight loss counseling) to patients with higher weight (BMI ≥30 kg/m2). The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends this practice on the basis that behavioral weight-related advice can motivate patients to attempt weight loss; however, it is also possible that this advice has adverse consequences (e.g., negative psychological reactions). In this study, we examined people's reported reactions to a recent experience of receiving weight-related advice from a healthcare provider. U.S. adults (N = 189) with higher weight who reported having received weight-related advice completed an online survey via Prolific. They answered questions about their most recent experience of receiving weight-related advice, including the purpose of the visit, characteristics of their provider, and characteristics of the advice itself. They also provided demographic information and indicated their trust in healthcare providers and the healthcare system. 90.5% of participants (n = 171) reported having one of three types of reactions to their provider's weight-related advice. Participants (1) felt motivated to change their behaviors and weight; (2) felt bad or guilty about their behaviors and weight; or (3) felt both motivated to change and bad or guilty. Using chi-square tests of independence and one-way ANOVAs, we examined how various participant characteristics and characteristics of the visit, provider, and advice itself differed across these three groups. We found significant demographic differences across the groups and found that a disproportionate amount of people in the “motivated” group reported having requested the weight-related advice and having had a two-way discussion about weight with their provider. Whereas some people feel motivated after receiving weight-related advice from a healthcare provider, others are left feeling bad about themselves or ambivalent. Understanding these varied reactions may provide insights into how healthcare providers can deliver advice that is motivating without eliciting negative psychological reactions.

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Interventions to Increase Female Breast and Cervical Cancer Screens: A Systematic Review.

To systematically review published cost-effectiveness analyses of Evidence-Based Interventions (EBIs) recommended by the United States Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) to increase breast and cervical cancer screening. We searched PubMed and Embase for prospective cost-effectiveness evaluations of EBIs for breast and cervical cancer screening since 1999. We reviewed studies according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) and compared the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs), defined as cost per additional woman screened, adjusted to 2021 USD, within and across EBIs by cancer type. We identified eleven studies meeting our review criteria: nine were breast cancer-focused, one breast and cervical cancer combined, and one cervical only, which together reported twenty-four cost-effectiveness assessments of outreach programs spanning eight EBIs. One-on-one education programs were the most common EBI evaluated. The average ICER across breast cancer studies was USD 545 (standard deviation [SD] = USD 729.3), while that for cervical cancer studies was USD 197 (SD = 186.6. Provider reminder/recall systems for women already linked to formal care were the most cost-effective, with an average ICERs of USD 41.3 and USD 10.6 for breast and cervical cancer, respectively. Variability in ICERs across and within EBIs reflect the population studied, the specific EBI, and study settings, and was relatively high. ICER estimate uncertainty and the potential for program replicability in other settings and with other populations were not addressed. Given these limitations, using existing cost-effectiveness estimates to inform program funding allocations is not warranted at this time. Additional research is needed on outreach programs for cervical cancer and those which serve minority populations for either of the female cancer screens.

Patient–Provider Discussions About Alcohol Use by Cancer History

IntroductionThe US Preventive Services Task Force recommends that all adults be screened for alcohol use and those with hazardous use be provided a brief discussion. However, it is unclear to what extent healthcare providers screen for and discuss alcohol use with cancer survivors. MethodsFrequency and content of alcohol pre-screening and provider discussion about alcohol use was examined comparing cancer survivors and non-cancer controls in the 2015-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance and complex survey procedures were used to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) adjusted for demographic characteristics. Data were analyzed in 2022. ResultsThe prevalence of alcohol pre-screening in a healthcare setting (78.4% vs 74.3%; PR: 1.05 [95% CI: 1.03 – 1.08]) and self-report of an in-person discussion about alcohol use with a healthcare provider (58.7% vs 55.0%; PR:1.07 [95% CI: 1.03-1.10]) was higher among cancer survivors compared with non-cancer controls. Among those who had a discussion, the prevalence of being asked about drinking quantity was higher among cancer survivors compared with non-cancer controls (PR:1.05 [95% CI: 1.02-1.08]). Among cancer survivors who reported usually consuming 3+ drinks per day in the past 30 days, only 15% [95% CI: 10.8-20.5] reported that a healthcare provider advised them to cut down on their drinking. ConclusionsCancer survivors are being screened for alcohol use, but heavier users are infrequently advised by healthcare providers to reduce their consumption.

A Novel Approach for Conducting a Catchment Area Analysis of Breast Cancer by Age and Stage for a Community Cancer Center.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently issued an updated draft recommendation statement to initiate breast cancer screening at age 40, reflecting well-documented disparities in breast cancer-related mortality that disproportionately impact younger Black women. This study applied a novel approach to identify hotspots of breast cancer diagnosed before age 50 and/or at an advanced stage to improve breast cancer detection within these communities. Cancer registry data for 3,497 women with invasive breast cancer diagnosed or treated between 2012 and 2020 at the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center and Research Institute (HFGCCRI) and who resided in the HFGCCRI catchment area, defined as New Castle County, Delaware, were geocoded and analyzed with spatial intensity. Standardized incidence ratios stratified by age and race were calculated for each hotspot. Four hotspots were identified, two for breast cancer diagnosed before age 50, one for advanced breast cancer, and one for advanced breast cancer diagnosed before age 50. Younger Black women were overrepresented in these hotspots relative to the full-catchment area. The novel use of spatial methods to analyze a community cancer center catchment area identified geographic areas with higher rates of breast cancer with poor prognostic factors and evidence that these areas made an outsized contribution to racial disparities in breast cancer. Identifying and prioritizing hotspot breast cancer communities for community outreach and engagement activities designed to improve breast cancer detection have the potential to reduce the overall burden of breast cancer and narrow racial disparities in breast cancer.

“Insufficient evidence” for screening for speech/language delays under age 5

In January the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) announced that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger who don't show any signs or symptoms of delays.

Young Women's Perspectives on Being Screened for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer Risk During Routine Primary Care

PurposeThe U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening women to identify individuals eligible for genetic counseling based on a priori hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) risk (i.e., risk assessment). However, risk assessment has not been widely integrated into primary care. This qualitative study explored young women's views on implementing routine HBOC risk assessment with a focus on equity and patient-centeredness. MethodsWe conducted group discussions with young women (aged 21–40 years) receiving care in an integrated health care system. Discussion groups occurred in two phases and used a modified deliberative approach that included a didactic component and prioritized developing consensus. Twenty women participated in one of three initial small group discussions (phase one). All 20 were invited to participate in a subsequent large group discussion (phase two), and 15 of them attended. FindingsKey themes and recommendations were as follows. Risk assessment should be accessible, contextualized, and destigmatized to encourage participation and reduce anxiety, particularly for women who do not know their family history. Providers conducting risk assessments must be equipped to address women's informational needs, relieve emotionality, and plan next steps after positive screens. Finally, to minimize differential screening uptake, health care systems must prioritize equity in program design and contribute to external educational and outreach efforts. ConclusionYoung women see pragmatic opportunities for health systems to optimize HBOC screening implementation.

Improving Lung Cancer Screening Selection: The HUNT Lung Cancer Risk Model for Ever-Smokers Versus the NELSON and 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force Criteria in the Cohort of Norway: A Population-Based Prospective Study

BackgroundImproving the method for selecting participants for lung cancer (LC) screening is an urgent need. Here, we compared the performance of the Helseundersøkelsen i Nord-Trøndelag (HUNT) Lung Cancer Model (HUNT LCM) versus the Dutch-Belgian lung cancer screening trial (Nederlands-Leuvens Longkanker Screenings Onderzoek (NELSON)) and 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria regarding LC risk prediction and efficiency. MethodsWe used linked data from 10 Norwegian prospective population-based cohorts, Cohort of Norway. The study included 44,831 ever-smokers, of which 686 (1.5%) patients developed LC; the median follow-up time was 11.6 years (0.01–20.8 years). ResultsWithin 6 years, 222 (0.5%) individuals developed LC. The NELSON and 2021 USPSTF criteria predicted 37.4% and 59.5% of the LC cases, respectively. By considering the same number of individuals as the NELSON and 2021 USPSTF criteria selected, the HUNT LCM increased the LC prediction rate by 41.0% and 12.1%, respectively. The HUNT LCM significantly increased sensitivity (p < 0.001 and p = 0.028), and reduced the number needed to predict one LC case (29 versus 40, p < 0.001 and 36 versus 40, p = 0.02), respectively. Applying the HUNT LCM 6-year 0.98% risk score as a cutoff (14.0% of ever-smokers) predicted 70.7% of all LC, increasing LC prediction rate with 89.2% and 18.9% versus the NELSON and 2021 USPSTF, respectively (both p < 0.001). ConclusionsThe HUNT LCM was significantly more efficient than the NELSON and 2021 USPSTF criteria, improving the prediction of LC diagnosis, and may be used as a validated clinical tool for screening selection.

Patient-Provider Lung Cancer Screening Discussions: An Analysis of a National Survey

BackgroundThe US Preventative Service Task Force (USPSTF) updated lung cancer screening (LCS) recommendations with annual low-dose CT (LDCT) in 2021. We aimed to assess prevalence of patient-provider discussion about LCS and determine its associated factors. Materials and MethodsUsing data from Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) 2022 cycle 6, 2 cohorts were evaluated: (1) potentially LCS-eligible, included participants at least 50 years old with a history of smoking and no prior history of lung cancer; (2) LCS-ineligible individuals based on age (eg, 18-49 years old), smoking history (eg, never smoked), or history of lung cancer. We assessed association of demographic, clinical, and social factors with LDCT discussion in a multivariable logistic regression model. ResultsAmong potentially LCS-eligible patients, 19% had never heard of LDCT and only 9.4% had discussed LCS with their provider within the past year. Those who accessed online patient portals were more likely to discuss LCS with their healthcare provider (OR, 4.25; 95% CI, 1.67, 10.81; P, .003), as were respondents with a history of current (vs. former) smoking (OR, 3.15; 95% CI, 1.21, 8.19; P, .019). Among LCS-ineligible, 1.9% discussed LCS with their providers. Individuals with a personal history of cancer (OR, 6.70; 95% CI, 1.65, 27.19; P, .009), and those who discussed colorectal cancer screening (OR, 5.74; 95% CI, 1.63, 20.14; P, .007) were more likely to discuss LCS with their provider. ConclusionDespite updated USPSTF recommendations, rates of patient-provider LCS remains low. Multi-level interventions to address barriers to LCS are needed.

Multilevel approaches to address disparities in lung cancer screening: a study protocol

BackgroundLow-dose computed tomography (lung cancer screening) can reduce lung cancer-specific mortality by 20–24%. Based on this evidence, the United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual lung cancer screening for asymptomatic high-risk individuals. Despite this recommendation, utilization is low (3–20%). Lung cancer screening may be particularly beneficial for African American patients because they are more likely to have advanced disease, lower survival, and lower screening rates compared to White individuals. Evidence points to multilevel approaches that simultaneously address multiple determinants to increase screening rates and decrease lung cancer burden in minoritized populations. This study will test the effects of provider- and patient-level strategies for promoting equitable lung cancer screening utilization.MethodsGuided by the Health Disparities Research Framework and the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model, we will conduct a quasi-experimental study with four primary care clinics within a large health system (MedStar Health). Individuals eligible for lung cancer screening, defined as 50–80 years old, ≥ 20 pack-years, currently smoking, or quit < 15 years, no history of lung cancer, who have an appointment scheduled with their provider, and who are non-adherent to screening will be identified via the EHR, contacted, and enrolled (N = 184 for implementation clinics, N = 184 for comparison clinics; total N = 368). Provider participants will include those practicing at the partner clinics (N = 26). To increase provider-prompted discussions about lung screening, an electronic health record (EHR) clinician reminder will be sent to providers prior to scheduled visits with the screening-eligible participants. To increase patient-level knowledge and patient activation about screening, an inreach specialist will conduct a pre-visit phone-based educational session with participants. Patient participants will be assessed at baseline and 1-week post-visit to measure provider-patient discussion, screening intentions, and knowledge. Screening referrals and screening completion rates will be assessed via the EHR at 6 months. We will use mixed methods and multilevel assessments of patients and providers to evaluate the implementation outcomes (adoption, feasibility, acceptability, and fidelity).DiscussionThe study will inform future work designed to measure the independent and overlapping contributions of the multilevel implementation strategies to advance equity in lung screening rates.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04675476. Registered December 19, 2020.