Health Disparities in Ovarian Cancer: Report From the Ovarian Cancer Evidence Review Conference.

Health disparity, defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as "preventable differences in the burden of disease, injury, violence, or opportunities to achieve optimal health that are experienced by socially disadvantaged populations," is seen across multiple diseases. We conducted an evidence review of health disparities and inequities and their mitigation strategies related to ovarian cancer as part of a CDC-sponsored project to develop educational materials for clinicians on the prevention and early diagnosis of gynecologic cancers. Our review found profound disparities in outcomes such as survival, treatment, and stage at diagnosis by factors such as race and ethnicity, insurance, socioeconomic status, and geographic location. We found little direct evidence on mitigation strategies. Studies support equivalent response to equivalent treatment between groups, suggesting that adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines can at least partially mitigate some of the differences.

Executive Summary of the Ovarian Cancer Evidence Review Conference.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention awarded funding to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists to develop educational materials for clinicians on gynecologic cancers. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists convened a panel of experts in evidence review from the Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology and content experts from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology to review relevant literature, best practices, and existing practice guidelines as a first step toward developing evidence-based educational materials for women's health care clinicians about ovarian cancer. Panel members conducted structured literature reviews, which were then reviewed by other panel members and discussed at a virtual meeting of stakeholder professional and patient advocacy organizations in February 2022. This article is the executive summary of the relevant literature and existing recommendations to guide clinicians in the prevention, early diagnosis, and special considerations of ovarian cancer. Substantive knowledge gaps are noted and summarized to provide guidance for future research.

Addressing disparities in the uptake of genetic counseling and testing in African American women; rationale, design and methods.

BACKGROUND: Genetic counseling and testing (GCT) informs risk reduction and management strategies in women at risk for carrying a pathogenic variation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) genes. African American (hereinafter referred to as Black) women are less likely to receive GCT services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The objective of this work was to examine existing literature regarding successful culturally tailored GCT interventions for Black women and to describe the rationale and protocol for a randomized feasibility trial to test the efficacy of a culturally tailored GCT intervention. METHODS/DESIGN: The For Our Health (FOH) study is a two-arm randomized control trial designed to test the efficacy of a video intervention to promote the uptake of GCT among Black women with a high risk of HBOC. The culturally tailored video intervention targets key beliefs, knowledge gaps, misconceptions, and key anticipated emotions relevant for GCT. After completing the baseline survey, 50 women at risk of HBOC will be randomized (1:1) to one of two trial arms: a YouTube video intervention or a publicly available fact sheet. Final assessments will immediately follow receipt of either video or fact sheet. CONCLUSION: Few studies have tested interventions to improve GCT uptake among Black women. The FOH trial will fill an important scientific gap in knowledge regarding strategies to reduce disparities in GCT among Black women at risk of HBOC.

Executive Summary of the Early-Onset Breast Cancer Evidence Review Conference.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention launched the Bring Your Brave campaign to increase knowledge about early-onset breast cancer, defined as breast cancer in women aged 18-45 years. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists convened a panel of experts in breast disease from the Society for Academic Specialists in General Obstetrics and Gynecology to review relevant literature, validated tools, best practices, and practice guidelines as a first step toward developing educational materials for women's health care providers about early-onset breast cancer. Panel members conducted structured literature reviews, which were then reviewed by other panel members and discussed at an in-person meeting of stakeholder professional and patient advocacy organizations in April 2019. This article summarizes the relevant literature, existing guidance, and validated tools to guide health care providers in the prevention, early detection, and special considerations of early-onset breast cancer. Substantive knowledge gaps were noted and summarized to provide guidance for future research.

Galactocele in a Prepubertal Girl.

BACKGROUND: Galactoceles have been previously described as an unusual cause of benign breast enlargement in male infants and children. CASE: A 3-year-old prepubertal girl presented with a right-sided breast mass and was found to have a 4.4-cm hypoechoic cyst on ultrasound imaging with otherwise normal endocrine studies including prolactin levels. She underwent cyst aspiration which revealed milky fluid. Fat globules were identified with microscopic examination, confirming the diagnosis of a galactocele. Aspiration resolved the mass. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: The etiology of galactoceles in nonlactating women is poorly understood. Traditionally, treatment of these benign cysts in male children has been surgical excision. In prepubertal girls, conservative management by surveillance or needle aspiration is warranted to prevent damage to developing breast tissue.

Controversies in Screening Mammography.

The utility and effectiveness of screening mammography in diagnosing breast cancer at earlier stages and reducing disease-specific mortality remain controversial especially as to when to start and stop routine mammographic screening, and whether mammograms should be performed annually or biennially in average-risk women. This manuscript will analyze the available moderate and high-quality data to analyze both the benefits (lives saved and life-years saved) and inconveniences/harms (additional views, extra biopsies/overdiagnosis, and overtreatment of ductal carcinoma in situ) of different mammography screening guidelines to assist the practitioner in counseling their patients in clinical practice.