Cannabis and cocaine use, drinking outcomes, and quality of life in general hospital inpatients with alcohol use disorder.

Background: While associations between cannabis and cocaine use, and heavy drinking and quality of life (QOL), are well-established in the general population, it is unclear whether they are present in hospital inpatients with alcohol use disorder (AUD). The aim of the study was to assess associations between cannabis and cocaine use and two outcomes [heavy drinking days (HDDs) and QOL] among hospital inpatients with AUD. Methods: Hospitalized patients with AUD and at least one past-month HDD participated in this cross-sectional study. Cannabis and cocaine use were assessed using the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test. HDDs were assessed using the Timeline Followback. QOL was assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF instrument. Multivariable regression models assessed associations. Results: Of 248 participants, 225 (91%) had severe AUD. There were no statistically significant associations between: recent cannabis use and HDDs [Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) = 0.95; 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI): 0.80, 1.14], cocaine use and HDDs [IRR = 0.88; 95% CI: 0.66, 1.18], or both cannabis and cocaine use and HDDs [IRR = 0.87; 95%CI: 0.70, 1.09], as compared to use of neither cannabis nor cocaine. Use of cannabis, cocaine, and both, were not associated with QOL [(odds ratio (OR) = 0.98; 95% CI:0.55, 1.74), (OR = 0.76; 95% CI:0.30, 1.93), (OR = 1.00; 95%CI: 0.49, 2.03), respectively]. Conclusions: Among hospital inpatients with AUD, there were no significant associations between cannabis and cocaine use, heavy drinking, or QOL. Our findings raise questions regarding how drug use affects AUD and whether similar results would be found among those with milder AUD and in prospective studies.

A randomized controlled trial of disclosing genetic risk information for Alzheimer disease via telephone.

PurposeTelephone disclosure of genetic test results can improve access to services. To date, studies of its impact have focused on return of Mendelian risk information, principally hereditary cancer syndromes.MethodsIn a multisite trial of Alzheimer disease genetic risk disclosure, asymptomatic adults were randomized to receive test results in person or via telephone. Primary analyses examined patient outcomes 12 months after disclosure.ResultsData from 257 participants showed that telephone disclosure occurred 7.4 days sooner and was 30% shorter, on average, than in-person disclosure (both P < 0.001). Anxiety and depression scores were well below cutoffs for clinical concern across protocols. Comparing telephone and in-person disclosure protocols, 99% confidence intervals of mean differences were within noninferiority margins on scales assessing anxiety, depression, and test-related distress, but inconclusive about positive impact. No differences were observed on measures of recall and subjective impact. Subanalyses supported noninferiority on all outcomes among apolipoprotein E (APOE) ɛ4-negative participants. Subanalyses were inconclusive for APOE ɛ4-positive participants, although mean anxiety and depression scores were still well below cutoffs for clinical concern.ConclusionTelephone disclosure of APOE results and risk for Alzheimer disease is generally safe and helps providers meet demands for services, even when results identify an increased risk for disease.

Intrauterine exposure to tobacco and executive functioning in high school.

BACKGROUND: Executive functioning (EF), an umbrella construct encompassing gradual maturation of cognitive organization/management processes, is important to success in multiple settings including high school. Intrauterine tobacco exposure (IUTE) correlates with negative cognitive/behavioral outcomes, but little is known about its association with adolescent EF and information from real-life contexts is sparse. We evaluated the impact of IUTE on teacher-reported observations of EF in urban high school students controlling for covariates including other intrauterine and adolescent substance exposures. METHODS: A prospective low-income birth cohort (51% male; 89% African American/Caribbean) was followed through late adolescence (16-18 years old). At birth, intrauterine exposures to cocaine and other substances (52% cocaine, 52% tobacco, 26% marijuana, 26% alcohol) were identified by meconium and/or urine assays, and/or maternal self-report. High school teachers knowledgeable about the student and unaware of study aims were asked to complete the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functioning-Teacher Form (BRIEF-TF) annually. RESULTS: Teachers completed at least one BRIEF-TF for 131 adolescents. Multivariable analyses included controls for: demographics; intrauterine cocaine, marijuana, and alcohol exposures; early childhood exposures to lead; and violence exposure from school-age to adolescence. IUTE was associated with less optimal BRIEF-TF Behavioral Regulation scores (p <0.05). Other intrauterine substance exposures did not predict less optimal BRIEF-TF scores, nor did exposures to violence, lead, nor adolescents' own substance use. CONCLUSIONS: IUTE is associated with offspring's less optimal EF. Prenatal counseling should emphasize abstinence from tobacco, as well as alcohol and illegal substances.

Personal Genomic Testing for Cancer Risk: Results From the Impact of Personal Genomics Study.

Purpose Significant concerns exist regarding the potential for unwarranted behavior changes and the overuse of health care resources in response to direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing (PGT). However, little is known about customers' behaviors after PGT. Methods Longitudinal surveys were given to new customers of 23andMe (Mountain View, CA) and Pathway Genomics (San Diego, CA). Survey data were linked to individual-level PGT results through a secure data transfer process. Results Of the 1,042 customers who completed baseline and 6-month surveys (response rate, 71.2%), 762 had complete cancer-related data and were analyzed. Most customers reported that learning about their genetic risk of cancers was a motivation for testing (colorectal, 88%; prostate, 95%; breast, 94%). No customers tested positive for pathogenic mutations in highly penetrant cancer susceptibility genes. A minority of individuals received elevated single nucleotide polymorphism-based PGT cancer risk estimates (colorectal, 24%; prostate, 24%; breast, 12%). At 6 months, customers who received elevated PGT cancer risk estimates were not significantly more likely to change their diet, exercise, or advanced planning behaviors or engage in cancer screening, compared with individuals at average or reduced risk. Men who received elevated PGT prostate cancer risk estimates changed their vitamin and supplement use more than those at average or reduced risk (22% v 7.6%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 3.41; 95% CI, 1.44 to 8.18). Predictors of 6-month behavior include baseline behavior (exercise, vitamin or supplement use, and screening), worse health status (diet and vitamin or supplement use), and older age (advanced planning, screening). Conclusion Most adults receiving elevated direct-to-consumer PGT single nucleotide polymorphism-based cancer risk estimates did not significantly change their diet, exercise, advanced care planning, or cancer screening behaviors.

Risk Stratification and Shared Decision Making for Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Eliciting patient preferences within the context of shared decision making has been advocated for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, yet providers often fail to comply with patient preferences that differ from their own. PURPOSE: To determine whether risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) influences provider willingness to comply with patient preferences when selecting a desired CRC screening option. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Asymptomatic, average-risk patients due for CRC screening in an urban safety net health care setting. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized 1:1 to a decision aid alone (n= 168) or decision aid plus risk assessment (n= 173) arm between September 2012 and September 2014. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was concordance between patient preference and test ordered; secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction with the decision-making process, screening intentions, test completion rates, and provider satisfaction. RESULTS: Although providers perceived risk stratification to be useful in selecting an appropriate screening test for their average-risk patients, no significant differences in concordance were observed between the decision aid alone and decision aid plus risk assessment groups (88.1% v. 85.0%,P= 0.40) or high- and low-risk groups (84.5% v. 87.1%,P= 0.51). Concordance was highest for colonoscopy and relatively low for tests other than colonoscopy, regardless of study arm or risk group. Failure to comply with patient preferences was negatively associated with satisfaction with the decision-making process, screening intentions, and test completion rates. LIMITATIONS: Single-institution setting; lack of provider education about the utility of risk stratification into their decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Providers perceived risk stratification to be useful in their decision making but often failed to comply with patient preferences for tests other than colonoscopy, even among those deemed to be at low risk of ACN.

A Risk Prediction Index for Advanced Colorectal Neoplasia at Screening Colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: Eliciting patient preferences within the context of shared decision making has been advocated for colorectal cancer screening. Risk stratification for advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) might facilitate more effective shared decision making when selecting an appropriate screening option. Our objective was to develop and validate a clinical index for estimating the probability of ACN at screening colonoscopy. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 3,543 asymptomatic, mostly average-risk patients 50-79 years of age undergoing screening colonoscopy at two urban safety net hospitals. Predictors of ACN were identified using multiple logistic regression. Model performance was internally validated using bootstrapping methods. RESULTS: The final index consisted of five independent predictors of risk (age, smoking, alcohol intake, height, and a combined sex/race/ethnicity variable). Smoking was the strongest predictor (net reclassification improvement (NRI), 8.4%) and height the weakest (NRI, 1.5%). Using a simplified weighted scoring system based on 0.5 increments of the adjusted odds ratio, the risk of ACN ranged from 3.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.6-3.9) for the low-risk group (score ≤2) to 8.6% (95% CI, 7.4-9.7) for the intermediate/high-risk group (score 3-11). The model had moderate to good overall discrimination (C-statistic, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.66-0.72) and good calibration (P=0.73-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: A simple 5-item risk index based on readily available clinical data accurately stratifies average-risk patients into low- and intermediate/high-risk categories for ACN at screening colonoscopy. Uptake into clinical practice could facilitate more effective shared decision-making for CRC screening, particularly in situations where patient and provider test preferences differ.

Impact of patient and navigator race and language concordance on care after cancer screening abnormalities.

BACKGROUND: Patient navigation improves the timely diagnosis of cancer among minorities, but little is known about the effects of patient and navigator race and language concordance on health outcomes. METHODS: The authors investigated the effects of patient and navigator race and language concordance on the time to diagnosis of cancer screening abnormalities among participants in the Boston Patient Navigation Research Program, a clinical effectiveness trial for women who had breast or cervical cancer screening abnormalities identified from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2008. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using proportional hazards regression adjusting for clinical and demographic factors. RESULTS: In total, 1257 women had breast cancer screening abnormalities (n = 655) or cervical cancer screening abnormalities (n = 602) identified, and 56% were nonwhite. Language concordance was associated with timelier resolution for all patients in the cervical cancer screening abnormalities group during the first 90 days (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.80), and specifically for Spanish speakers during the first 90 days (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-1.84), but no difference was observed after 90 days for women who had cervical cancer screening abnormalities or at any time for those who had breast cancer screening abnormalities. Race concordance was associated with significant decreases in the time to diagnosis for minority women with breast and cervical cancer screening abnormalities in analyses stratified by race, but no differences were observed in analyses that included all women. CONCLUSIONS: Patient navigator race and language concordance improved the timeliness of care in a minority population. Patient navigators who are racially/ethnically diverse and multilingual may help address barriers to care and improve cancer outcomes for low-income minorities.

Multiple barriers delay care among women with abnormal cancer screening despite patient navigation.

BACKGROUND: While there is widespread dissemination of patient navigation programs in an effort to reduce delays in cancer care, little is known about the impact of barriers to care on timely outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of the Boston Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP) to examine the effect that the presence of barriers had on time to diagnostic resolution of abnormal breast or cervical cancer screening tests. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression with time to diagnostic resolution as the outcome to examine the effect of the number of barriers, controlling for demographic covariates and clustered by patients' primary navigator. RESULTS: There were 1481 women who received navigation; mean age was 39 years; 32% were White, 27% Black, and 31% Hispanic; 28% had private health insurance; and 38% did not speak English. Overall, half (n=745, 50%) had documentation of one or more barriers to care. Women with barriers were more likely to be older, non-White, non-English language speakers, and on public or no health insurance compared with women without barriers. In multivariable analyses, we found less timely diagnostic resolution as the number of barriers increased (one barrier, adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 0.81 [95% CI 0.56-1.17], p=0.26; two barriers, aHR 0.55 [95% CI 0.37-0.81], p=0.0025; three or more barriers, aHR 0.31 [95% CI 0.21-0.46], p<0.0001)]. CONCLUSION: Within a patient navigation program proven to reduce delays in care, we found that navigated patients with documented barriers to care experience less timely resolution of abnormal cancer screening tests.

Epidemiology of goblet cell and microvesicular hyperplastic polyps.

OBJECTIVES: Serrated polyps compromise both typical hyperplastic polyps as well as sessile serrated adenomas and dysplastic serrated polyps. Hyperplastic polyps exhibit two histological patterns: microvesicular hyperplastic polyps (MVHPs) and goblet cell hyperplastic polyps (GCHPs). MVHPs and GCHPs differ in their molecular signature. MVHPs have been frequently found to have the BRAF(V600E) mutation as well as aberrant methylation. In contrast, GCHPs have been associated with the KRAS mutation (KRAS-mut), which are infrequently seen in dysplastic serrated sessile adenomas. The particular risk factors that are associated with development of the types of hyperplastic polyps have not been previously studied. The purpose of this study is to characterize the associations between particular risk factors and the development of goblet cell or microvesicular hyperplastic polyps. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of 3,543 asymptomatic, mostly average risk patients 50 and 79 years of age undergoing open-access screening colonoscopy between March 2005 and January 2012. Each patient was given a survey regarding 25 reputed risk factors for colorectal neoplasia and the responses were correlated with findings at colonoscopy. Associations between putative risk factors for colorectal neoplasia and MVHPs and GSHPs were examined using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: MVHPS and GCHPs were identified in 5.3% and 8.7% of patients, respectively. The results of the statistical analysis indicate that a history of smoking greater than 20 years is associated with an increased risk of MVHPs (P<0.005) and GCHPs (P<0.005). An elevated BMI >30 kg/m(2) was also associated with the presence of MVHP at colonoscopy (P<0.005). Blacks and Asians appear to be protected from the development of MVHPs. In contrast, there was a positive association with the presence of GCHP at colonoscopy in blacks. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that the development of the distinct histological types of hyperplastic polyps are associated with distinct modifiable and non-modifiable lifestyle factors.

Impact of depression on the intensity of patient navigation for women with abnormal cancer screenings.

Patient navigation is increasingly being used to support vulnerable patients to receive timely and quality medical care. We sought to understand whether patients with depression utilize additional patient navigation services after abnormal cancer screening. We compared depressed and non-depressed women using three different measures of intensity of patient navigation: number of patient-navigator encounters, encounter time, and number of unique barriers to care. The study population consisted of 1,455 women who received navigation after abnormal screening for breast or cervical cancer at one of six community health centers in Boston. Navigators spent a median of 60-75 minutes over one or two encounters per participant, with 49% of participants having one or more documented barrier to care. Depressed women did not differ in total numbers of encounters, encounter time, or unique barriers compared with non-depressed women. Our findings suggest that pre-existing depression does not predict which women will utilize additional navigation services.

Social service barriers delay care among women with abnormal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: Inequity in cancer outcomes for minorities and vulnerable populations has been linked to delays in cancer care that arise from barriers to accessing care. Social service barriers represent those obstacles related to meeting life's most basic needs, like housing and income, which are often supported by public policy, regulation and services. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between social service barriers and timely diagnostic resolution after a cancer screening abnormality. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of the intervention arm of Boston Patient Navigation Research Program (2007-2008) conducted across six urban community health centers. Subjects with no barriers, other barriers, and social service barriers were compared on their time to diagnostic resolution. SUBJECTS: Women ≥ 18 years of age with a breast or cervical cancer screening abnormality. MAIN MEASURES: Social service barriers included: income supports, housing and utilities, education and employment, and personal/family stability and safety. Time to event analyses compared across five groups: those with no barriers, one barrier (other), one barrier (social service), two or more barriers (all other), and two or more barriers (at least one social service). KEY RESULTS: 1,481 navigated women; 31 % Hispanic, 27 % Black, 32 % White; 37 % non-English speakers and 28 % had private health insurance. Eighty-eight women (6 %) had social service barriers. Compared to those without social service barriers, those with were more likely to be Hispanic, younger, have public/no health insurance, and have multiple barriers. Those with two or more barriers (at least one social service barrier), had the longest time to resolution compared to the other four groups (aHR resolution < 60 days = 0.27, ≥ 60 days = 0.37). CONCLUSION: Vulnerable women with multiple barriers, when at least one is a social service barrier, have delays in care despite navigation. The impact of patient navigation may never be fully realized if social service barriers persist without being identified or addressed.

Prevalence of advanced colorectal neoplasia in white and black patients undergoing screening colonoscopy in a safety-net hospital.

UNLABELLED: Chinese translation BACKGROUND: Black persons are more likely than white persons to be diagnosed with colorectal cancer and to die from it. The extent to which genetic or biological factors versus disparities in screening rates explain this variance remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: To define the prevalence and location of presymptomatic advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) among white and black persons undergoing screening colonoscopy, controlling for other epidemiologic risk factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey between 22 March 2005 and 31 January 2012. SETTING: Urban, open-access, academic, safety-net hospital in Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: Asymptomatic, average-risk white (n = 1172) and black (n = 1681) persons aged 50 to 79 years undergoing screening colonoscopy. MEASUREMENTS: Adjusted prevalence and location of ACN, defined as a tubular adenoma 10 mm or more in size, any adenoma with villous features or high-grade dysplasia, any dysplastic serrated lesion, or invasive cancer. RESULTS: The prevalence of ACN was higher among white patients than black patients (6.8% vs. 5.0%; P = 0.039) but varied by sex (white vs. black men, 9.3% vs. 5.7%; white vs. black women, 3.5% vs. 4.3%; interaction P = 0.034). After controlling for many risk factors, black men were 41% less likely than white men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39 to 0.89]) to have ACN. No statistically significant difference was seen for women (AOR, 1.32 [CI, 0.73 to 2.40]). Black patients with ACN had a higher percentage of proximal disease (52% vs. 39%) after adjustment for age and sex (P = 0.055). LIMITATION: Single-institution study with inadequate statistical power for subgroup analyses and recall bias. CONCLUSION: Black men are less likely than white men to have ACN at screening colonoscopy in a safety-net health care setting. Disparities in access to screening and differential exposure to modifiable risk factors rather than genetic or biological factors may be largely responsible for the higher incidence of CRC among black men. Genetic or biological factors may explain the predilection for proximal disease.

Aid-assisted decision making and colorectal cancer screening: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is a widely recommended yet unproven strategy for increasing colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake. Previous trials of decision aids to increase SDM and CRC screening uptake have yielded mixed results. PURPOSE: To assess the impact of decision aid-assisted SDM on CRC screening uptake. DESIGN: RCT. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: The study was conducted at an urban, academic safety-net hospital and community health center between 2005 and 2010. Participants were asymptomatic, average-risk patients aged 50-75 years due for CRC screening. INTERVENTION: Study participants (n=825) were randomized to one of two intervention arms (decision aid plus personalized risk assessment or decision aid alone) or control arm. The interventions took place just prior to a routine office visit with their primary care providers. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was completion of a CRC screening test within 12 months of the study visit. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of test completion and mediators of the intervention effect. Analysis was completed in 2011. RESULTS: Patients in the decision-aid group were more likely to complete a screening test than control patients (43.1% vs 34.8%, p=0.046) within 12 months of the study visit; conversely, test uptake for the decision aid and decision aid plus personalized risk assessment arms was similar (43.1% vs 37.1%, p=0.15). Assignment to the decision-aid arm (AOR=1.48, 95% CI=1.04, 2.10), black race (AOR=1.52, 95% CI=1.12, 2.06) and a preference for a patient-dominant decision-making approach (AOR=1.55, 95% CI=1.02, 2.35) were independent determinants of test completion. Activation of the screening discussion and enhanced screening intentions mediated the intervention effect. CONCLUSIONS: Decision aid-assisted SDM has a modest impact on CRC screening uptake. A decision aid plus personalized risk assessment tool is no more effective than a decision aid alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.govNCT00251862.

Boston Patient Navigation Research Program: the impact of navigation on time to diagnostic resolution after abnormal cancer screening.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for controlled studies to assess the impact of patient navigation in vulnerable cancer populations. METHODS: Boston Patient Navigation Research Program conducted a quasi-experimental patient navigation intervention across six federally qualified inner-city community health centers, three assigned to a breast cancer navigation intervention and three assigned to a cervical cancer navigation intervention; each group then served as the control for the other. Eligible women had an abnormal breast or cervical cancer screening test conducted at one of the participating health centers during a baseline (2004-2005) or intervention period (2007-2008). Kaplan-Meier survival curves and proportional hazards regression examined the effect of patient navigation on time to definitive diagnosis, adjusting for covariates, clustering by clinic and differences between the baseline and intervention period. RESULTS: We enrolled 997 subjects in the baseline period and 3,041 subjects during the intervention period, of whom 1,497 were in the navigated arm, and 1,544 in the control arm. There was a significant decrease in time to diagnosis for subjects in the navigated group compared with controls among those with a cervical screening abnormality [aHR 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-1.9]; and among those with a breast cancer screening abnormality that resolved after 60 days (aHR 1.40; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9), with no differences before 60 days. CONCLUSIONS: This study documents a benefit of patient navigation on time to diagnosis among a racially/ethnically diverse inner city population. IMPACT: Patient navigation may address cancer health disparities by reducing time to diagnosis following an abnormal cancer-screening event.

The Your Disease Risk Index for colorectal cancer is an inaccurate risk stratification tool for advanced colorectal neoplasia at screening colonoscopy.

Tailoring the use of screening colonoscopy based on the risk of advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) could optimize the cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. Our goal was to assess the accuracy of the Your Disease Risk (YDR) CRC risk index for stratifying average risk patients into low- versus intermediate/high-risk categories for ACN. The YDR risk assessment tool was administered to 3,317 asymptomatic average risk patients 50 to 79 years of age just before their screening colonoscopy. Associations between YDR-derived relative risk (RR) scores and ACN prevalence were examined using logistic regression and χ(2) analyses. ACN was defined as a tubular adenoma ≥1 cm, tubulovillous or villous adenoma of any size, and the presence of high-grade dysplasia or cancer. The overall prevalence of ACN was 5.6%. Although YDR-derived RR scores were linearly associated with ACN after adjusting for age and gender (P = 0.033), the index was unable to discriminate "below average" from "above/average" risk patients [OR, 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.75-1.37]. Considerable overlap in rates of ACN was also observed between the different YDR risk categories in our age- and gender-stratified analyses. The YDR index lacks accuracy for stratifying average risk patients into low- versus intermediate/high-risk categories for ACN.