What mediates the racial/ethnic disparity in psychosocial stress among breast cancer patients?

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have observed greater levels of psychosocial stress (PSS) among non-Hispanic (nH) African American and Hispanic women when compared to nH White patients after a breast cancer diagnosis. We aimed to determine the independent and interdependent roles of socioeconomic position (SEP) and unmet support in the racial disparity in PSS among breast cancer patients. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the Breast Cancer Care in Chicago study (n = 989). For all recently diagnosed breast cancer patients, aged 25-79, income, education, and tract-level disadvantage and affluence were summed to create a standardized socioeconomic position (SEP) score. Three measures of PSS related to loneliness, perceived stress, and psychological consequences of a breast cancer diagnosis were defined based on previously validated scales. Five domains of unmet social support needs (emotional, spiritual, informational, financial, and practical) were defined from interviews. We conducted path models in MPlus to estimate the extent to which PSS disparities were mediated by SEP and unmet social support needs. RESULTS: Black and Hispanic patients reported greater PSS compared to white patients and greater unmet social support needs (p = 0.001 for all domains). Virtually all of the disparity in PSS could be explained by SEP. A substantial portion of the mediating influence of SEP was further transmitted by unmet financial and practical needs among Black patients and by unmet emotional needs for Hispanic patients. CONCLUSIONS: SEP appeared to be a root cause of the racial/ethnic disparities in PSS within our sample. Our findings further suggest that different interventions may be necessary to alleviate the burden of SEP for nH AA (i.e., more financial support) and Hispanic patients (i.e., more emotional support).

Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment From the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium.

Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3% (95% CI = 44.1% to 48.6%) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8% (95% CI = 42.0% to 49.7%) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.

Relation between body mass index and lung cancer risk in men and women never and former smokers.

The authors assessed body mass index (BMI), measured as Quetelet's index (weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters), in relation to lung cancer risk in never and former smokers by using data from a population-based, individually matched, case-control study conducted in New York State from 1982 to 1985. To be included in the study, subjects must never have smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime (never smokers) or not have smoked more than 100 cigarettes during the last 10 years (former smokers). Data on height and weight were complete for 412 of 439 case-control pairs. A positive relation was found between BMI and lung cancer risk for both never smokers (188 case-control pairs) and former smokers (224 pairs). When subjects were combined, those in the eighth (highest) octile (BMI > 30.84) had more than twice the odds of being cases compared with those in the lowest octile (BMI < or =21.26, 95 percent confidence interval: 1.2, 4.4). These study results are consistent with those from studies of BMI and other cancer sites but differ from lung cancer results usually found in predominantly smoking populations.