Primary care physician referral practices regarding BRCA1/2 genetic counseling in a major health system.

PURPOSE: The United States Preventive Services Task Force recommends primary care physicians refer patients at high risk for BRCA1/2 mutations to genetic testing when appropriate. The objective of our study was to describe referrals for BRCA1/2 testing in a large integrated health system and to assess factors associated with referral. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study includes female patients between 18 and 50 years who had a primary care visit in the Cleveland Clinic Health System between 2010 and 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate differences in the odds of a woman being referred for BRCA1/2 testing by patient factors and referring physician specialty. We also assessed variation in referrals by physicians. RESULTS: Among 279,568 women, 5% were high risk. Of those, 22% were referred for testing. Black patients were significantly less likely to be referred than white patients (aOR 0.87; 95% CI 0.77, 0.98) and Jewish patients were more likely to be referred than non-Jewish patients (aOR 2.13; 95% CI 1.68, 2.70). Patients primarily managed by OB/GYN were significantly more likely to be referred than those cared for via Internal/Family Medicine (aOR 1.45; 95% CI 1.30, 1.61). Less than a quarter of primary care physicians ever referred a patient for testing. CONCLUSION: The majority of primary care patients at high risk for a BRCA1/2 mutation were not referred for testing, and over a decade, most physicians never referred a single patient. Internal/Family Medicine physicians, in particular, need support in identifying and referring women who could benefit from testing.

A risk prediction model to allow personalized screening for cervical cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Cervical cancer screening guidelines are in evolution. Current guidelines do not differentiate recommendations based on individual patient risk. OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate a tool for predicting individualized probability of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or higher (CIN2+) at a single time point, based on demographic factors and medical history. DESIGN: The study design consisted of an observational cohort with hierarchical generalized linear regression modeling. SETTING: The study was conducted in a setting of 33 primary care practices from 2004 to 2010. PARTICIPANTS: The participants of the study were women aged ≥ 30 years. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: CIN2+ was the main outcome on biopsy, and the following predictors were included: age, race, marital status, insurance type, smoking history, median income based on zip code, prior human papilloma virus (HPV) results. RESULTS: The final dataset included 99,319 women. Of these, 745 (0.75%) had CIN2+. The multivariable model had a C-statistic of 0.81. All factors but race were independently associated with CIN2+. The model categorized women as having below-average CIN2+ risk (0.15% predicted vs. 0.12% observed risk), average CIN2+ risk (0.42% predicted vs. 0.36% observed), and above-average CIN2+ risk (1.76% predicted vs. 1.85% observed). Before screening, women at below-average risk had a risk of CIN2+ well below that of women with ASCUS and HPV negative (0.12 vs. 0.20%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A multivariable model using data from the electronic health record was able to stratify women across a 50-fold gradient of risk for CIN2+. After further validation, use of a similar model could enable more targeted cervical cancer screening.

Cost-Effectiveness of Primary HPV Testing, Cytology and Co-testing as Cervical Cancer Screening for Women Above Age 30 Years.

BACKGROUND: Cervical cancer screening guidelines for women aged ≥30 years allow for co-testing or primary cytology testing. Our objective was to determine the test characteristics and costs associated with Cytology, HPV and Co-testing screening strategies. MAIN METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of women undergoing cervical cancer screening with both cytology and HPV (Hybrid Capture 2) testing from 2004 to 2010 in an integrated health system. The electronic health record was used to identify women aged ≥30 years who had co-testing. Unsatisfactory or unavailable test results and incorrectly ordered tests were excluded. The main outcome was biopsy-proven cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or higher (CIN3+). KEY RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 99,549 women. Subjects were mostly white (78.4 %), married (70.7 %), never smokers (61.3 %) and with private insurance (86.1 %). Overall, 5121 (5.1 %) tested positive for HPV and 6115 (6.1 %) had cytology ≥ ASCUS; 1681 had both and underwent colposcopy and 310 (0.3 %) had CIN3+. Sensitivity for CIN3+ was 91.9 % for Primary Cytology, 99.4 % for Co-testing, and 94.8 % for Primary HPV; specificity was 97.3 % for Co-testing and Primary Cytology and 97.9 % for Primary HPV. Over a 3-year screening interval, Primary HPV detected more cases of CIN3+ and was less expensive than Primary Cytology. Co-testing detected 14 more cases of CIN3+ than Primary HPV, but required an additional 100,277 cytology tests and 566 colposcopies at an added cost of $2.38 million, or $170,096 per additional case detected. CONCLUSIONS: Primary HPV was more effective and less expensive than Primary Cytology. Primary HPV screening appears to represent a cost-effective alternative to Co-testing.

Change in individual physicians' screening mammography completion rates following the updated USPSTF guideline supporting shared decision making: An observational cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To understand changes in physician screening practices in response to the 2009 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation supporting shared decision making (SDM) for mammography in women aged 40-49 years. METHODS: We assessed screening completion rates for physicians in the Cleveland Clinic Health System pre-2009 (2006-2008) and post-2009 (2010-2015), and rates for physicians new to the system post-2009. We used mixed effects logistic regression to estimate the odds of a woman receiving screening post-2009. If physicians practiced SDM, we hypothesized their screening rates would change after 2009. To test this, we included each physician's pre-2009 screening rate as a predictor in the model. RESULTS: Among 125 physicians, the screening rate increased from 40% to 45% from pre-2009 to post-2009. For physicians new to the health system post-2009 the rate was 32%. In the mixed effects model (N = 17,007), the strongest predictor of mammography receipt among patients post-2009 was their physician's pre-2009 screening rate (aOR:3.57 per 10% increase in pre-2009 rate; 95%CI:1.69-7.50). CONCLUSIONS: Whether a woman received a mammogram post-2009 was highly associated with her physicians' pre-2009 screening rate, suggesting physicians are not individualizing screening decisions via SDM. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Physicians may need support to effectively practice SDM.

Response to requests for contraception in one direct-to-consumer telemedicine service.

OBJECTIVE: To describe real-world care seeking and contraception provision in one direct to consumer telemedicine platform. STUDY DESIGN: We described encounters with reproductive age female patients between July 2016 and July 2018 seeking contraception on the American Well telemedicine platform. RESULTS: Of 126,712 total encounters with reproductive age women, 682 were with women seeking contraception, and 83% received it. The mean encounter length was 4.4 min versus 5.0 min for non-contraceptive visits. Insurance information was provided for 78% of contraceptive encounters versus 85% of non-contraceptive encounters, p < 0.001. Of the 27 encounters in which the patient requested emergency contraception, three did not result in such a prescription. CONCLUSION: Direct to consumer telemedicine may increase access to contraceptives, yet overall use was uncommon. Most women seeking contraception via direct to consumer telemedicine on this platform received it. Three women who requested emergency contraception did not receive it, yet reasons for this are unknown.

Is there a time limit for systemic menopausal hormone therapy?

In deciding whether it is time to stop hormone therapy, in addition to the patient's age we need to consider her preferences, symptoms, quality of life, time since menopause, hysterectomy status, and personal risks of osteoporosis, breast cancer, heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism. This article presents the evidence for and against extending hormone therapy and a guide for making this highly individualized and shared decision.

Cervical cancer screening: what's new and what's coming?

In their 2012 guidelines for cervical cancer screening, several organizations call for less-frequent but more-effective screening that incorporates testing for human papillomavirus (HPV). We review these recommendations and the possible future direction of screening.

Human papillomavirus vaccine: safe, effective, underused.

Vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV) is safe and effective. It is recommended for females age 9 to 26 and for males age 11 to 26, yet vaccination rates are low. We review the host immune response, the data behind the recommendations for HPV vaccination, and the challenges of implementing the vaccination program.