Validation of a whole slide image management system for metabolic-associated steatohepatitis for clinical trials.

The gold standard for enrollment and endpoint assessment in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatosis clinical trials is histologic assessment of a liver biopsy performed on glass slides. However, obtaining the evaluations from several expert pathologists on glass is challenging, as shipping the slides around the country or around the world is time-consuming and comes with the hazards of slide breakage. This study demonstrated that pathologic assessment of disease activity in steatohepatitis, performed using digital images on the AISight whole slide image management system, yields results that are comparable to those obtained using glass slides. The accuracy of scoring for steatohepatitis (nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity score ≥4 with ≥1 for each feature and absence of atypical features suggestive of other liver disease) performed on the system was evaluated against scoring conducted on glass slides. Both methods were assessed for overall percent agreement with a consensus "ground truth" score (defined as the median score of a panel of three pathologists' glass slides). Each case was also read by three different pathologists, once on glass and once digitally with a minimum 2-week washout period between the modalities. It was demonstrated that the average agreement across three pathologists of digital scoring with ground truth was noninferior to the average agreement of glass scoring with ground truth [noninferiority margin: -0.05; difference: -0.001; 95% CI: (-0.027, 0.026); and p < 0.0001]. For each pathologist, there was a similar average agreement of digital and glass reads with glass ground truth (pathologist A, 0.843 and 0.849; pathologist B, 0.633 and 0.605; and pathologist C, 0.755 and 0.780). Here, we demonstrate that the accuracy of digital reads for steatohepatitis using digital images is equivalent to glass reads in the context of a clinical trial for scoring using the Clinical Research Network scoring system.

Cancer information sources used by patients to inform and influence treatment decisions.

Previous research has indicated that treatment staff often underestimate the informational needs of cancer patients. In this study, the authors determined the total number of information sources obtained and used to influence treatment decisions, and the clinical and demographic factors associated with the use of specific sources of information in cancer patients. Participants were identified by the statewide cancer registry and diagnosed in 2004 with breast, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer. A self-administered mailed questionnaire elicited cancer treatments, demographics, and information sources used to make treatment decisions. Of those surveyed, 1,784 (66%) participated and responded to all questions regarding information use. Over 69% of study participants reported obtaining information from a source other than the treatment staff. Significant predictors of using additional information sources included younger age, higher income, higher education, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use, and reporting shared decision making (all p values <.01). Participants with a college degree were more likely to use the Internet (OR 3.7; 95% CI 1.5-9.0) and scientific research reports (OR 3.3; 95% CI 1.6-6.9) to influence treatment decisions compared with those without a high school degree. Support group use to influence treatment decisions was not associated with socioeconomic variables but did vary by cancer type and CAM use. The sources of information study participants obtained and used to influence treatment decisions varied strongly by socioeconomic and demographic variables. These findings provide a deeper understanding of the information needs of cancer patients and have implications for dissemination strategies that can minimize disparities in access to cancer information.

Gender disparities in colorectal cancer screening: true or false?

To date, nearly all studies examining gender disparities in colorectal cancer screening report a lower endoscopic screening rate in women. Using a statewide claims database, gender differences in screening rates were analyzed in an attempt to validate gender disparities reported in prior survey-based studies. Procedural-level dataset containing all patient encounters for 2003 in which a colonoscopy or flexible sigmoidoscopy were performed was created. Procedures were selected using CPT codes and univariate analysis was performed using SAS v 8.0. Statewide for average-risk individuals 50 years or older, 65,232 endoscopic procedures were performed in 2003. The majority (83%) of endoscopic screening procedures were colonoscopies. Overall, the rate of screening in average-risk women 50 years or older (38 procedures/1000 people) was slightly lower than in men (42/1000) but not statistically significant. The rates of screening were higher in women before the age of 60 years and lower after the age of 60 years. No clinically significant difference was found in the type of screening procedure performed. Gender disparities in rates and types of colorectal cancer screening reported in prior survey studies are not validated in this patient encounter data study.

Updating progress in cancer control in Wisconsin.

BACKGROUND: In 1989, experts in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment met in Madison to set the public health agenda for cancer control. Part of the plan defined target percent change in cancer mortality rates to be met by the year 2000. During the 1990s, public health and health care professionals developed programs and policies to reach these goals. The purpose of this analysis is to evaluate Wisconsin's progress in reducing cancer mortality and success in meeting the year 2000 objectives. METHODS: Wisconsin mortality data for 1984-1986 and 1999-2001 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC Wonder. Percent change was calculated between the 2 time periods and compared to the 2000 target percent change for all-site cancer and site specific cancer mortality. RESULTS: All-site cancer mortality decreased by 7% from 1984-1986 to 1999-2001 with a greater than 16% decline in age groups <65 years. Mortality from breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer each decreased by at least 25%. Lung cancer and malignant melanoma mortality rates increased by 5% and 17%, respectively. Among additionally analyzed cancers, mortality decreased in prostate, stomach, and childhood cancers and increased in liver cancer and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. CONCLUSION: The results of the state's cancer control effort are mixed. The year 2000 objectives were met for breast and colorectal cancer. Progress was made in reducing mortality from cervical cancer and from all sites combined, but the other year 2000 objectives were not met. Mortality rates increased for lung cancer and malignant melanoma during the 15-year period.