Association between adverse childhood experiences and later-life allostatic load in UK Biobank female participants.

BACKGROUND: Adverse childhood experiences during key developmental periods have been shown to impact long-term health outcomes. Adverse childhood experiences may include psychological, physical, or sexual abuse; neglect; or socioeconomic factors. Adverse childhood experiences are linked with an increase in poor health behavior such as smoking and alcohol consumption, and may also influence epigenetic changes, inflammatory response, metabolic changes, and allostatic load. OBJECTIVE: We sought to explore associations between adverse childhood experiences and allostatic load in adult female participants in the UK Biobank. DESIGN: The UK Biobank is a multisite cohort study established to capture lifestyle, environment, exposure, health history, and genotype data on individuals in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Adverse childhood experiences were assessed from the Childhood Trauma Screener, which measures abuse and neglect across five items. Biological measures at enrollment were used to construct allostatic load, including measures of metabolic, inflammatory, and cardiovascular function. Females with a cancer diagnosis prior to enrollment were removed as it may influence allostatic load. Poisson regression models were used to assess the association between adverse childhood experiences and allostatic load, accounting for a priori confounders. RESULTS: A total of 33,466 females with complete data were analyzed, with a median age at enrollment of 54 (range = 40-70) years. Among the study sample, the mean allostatic load ranged from 1.85 in those who reported no adverse childhood experiences to 2.45 in those with all adverse childhood experiences reported. In multivariable analysis, there was a 4% increase in average allostatic load among females for every additional adverse childhood experience reported (incidence rate ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval = 1.03-1.05). Similar results were observed when assessing individual adverse childhood experience components. CONCLUSION: This analysis supports a growing body of evidence suggesting that increased exposure to early life abuse or neglect is associated with increased allostatic load in females.

Association of Social Determinants and Tumor Biology With Racial Disparity in Survival From Early-Stage, Hormone-Dependent Breast Cancer.

Importance: Black women with hormone receptor-positive breast cancer experience the greatest racial disparity in survival of all breast cancer subtypes. The relative contributions of social determinants of health and tumor biology to this disparity are uncertain. Objective: To determine the proportion of the Black-White disparity in breast cancer survival from estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, axillary node-negative breast cancer that is associated with adverse social determinants and high-risk tumor biology. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective mediation analysis of factors associated with the racial disparity in breast cancer death for cases diagnosed between 2004 and 2015 with follow-up through 2016 was carried out using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Oncotype registry. The study included women in the SEER-18 registry who were aged 18 years or older at diagnosis of a first primary invasive breast cancer tumor that was axillary node-negative and ER-positive, who were Black (Black), non-Hispanic White (White), and for whom the 21-gene breast recurrence score was available. Data analysis took place between March 4, 2021, and November 15, 2022. Exposures: Census tract socioeconomic disadvantage, insurance status, tumor characteristics including the recurrence score, and treatment variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: Death due to breast cancer. Results: The analysis with 60 137 women (mean [IQR] age 58.1 [50-66] years) included 5648 (9.4%) Black women and 54 489 (90.6%) White women. With a median (IQR) follow-up time of 56 (32-86) months, the age-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for breast cancer death among Black compared with White women was 1.82 (95% CI, 1.51-2.20). Neighborhood disadvantage and insurance status together mediated 19% of the disparity (mediated HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.31-2.00; P < .001) and tumor biological characteristics mediated 20% (mediated HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.28-1.90; P < .001). A fully adjusted model that included all covariates accounted for 44% of the racial disparity (mediated HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71; P < .001). Neighborhood disadvantage mediated 8% of the racial difference in the probability of a high-risk recurrence score (P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, racial differences in social determinants of health and indicators of aggressive tumor biology including a genomic biomarker were equally associated with the survival disparity in early-stage, ER-positive breast cancer among US women. Future research should examine more comprehensive measures of socioecological disadvantage, molecular mechanisms underlying aggressive tumor biology among Black women, and the role of ancestry-related genetic variants.

Structural racism is a mediator of disparities in acute myeloid leukemia outcomes.

Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) and Hispanic patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have higher mortality rates than non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients despite more favorable genetics and younger age. A discrete survival analysis was performed on 822 adult patients with AML from 6 urban cancer centers and revealed inferior survival among NHB (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15, 2.22) and Hispanic (HR = 1.25; 95% CI: 0.88, 1.79) patients compared with NHW patients. A multilevel analysis of disparities was then conducted to investigate the contribution of neighborhood measures of structural racism on racial/ethnic differences in survival. Census tract disadvantage and affluence scores were individually calculated. Mediation analysis of hazard of leukemia death between groups was examined across 6 composite variables: structural racism (census tract disadvantage, affluence, and segregation), tumor biology (European Leukemia Network risk and secondary leukemia), health care access (insurance and clinical trial enrollment), comorbidities, treatment patterns (induction intensity and transplant utilization), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission during induction chemotherapy. Strikingly, census tract measures accounted for nearly all of the NHB-NHW and Hispanic-NHW disparity in leukemia death. Treatment patterns, including induction intensity and allogeneic transplant, and treatment complications, as assessed by ICU admission during induction chemotherapy, were additional mediators of survival disparities in AML. This is the first study to formally test mediators for observed disparities in AML survival and highlights the need to investigate the mechanisms by which structural racism interacts with known prognostic and treatment factors to influence leukemia outcomes.

Health Insurance Status as a Predictor of Mode of Colon Cancer Detection but Not Stage at Diagnosis: Implications for Early Detection.

OBJECTIVE: For colon cancer patients, one goal of health insurance is to improve access to screening that leads to early detection, early-stage diagnosis, and polyp removal, all of which results in easier treatment and better outcomes. We examined associations among health insurance status, mode of detection (screen detection vs symptomatic presentation), and stage at diagnosis (early vs late) in a diverse sample of patients recently diagnosed with colon cancer from the Chicago metropolitan area. METHODS: Data came from the Colon Cancer Patterns of Care in Chicago study of racial and socioeconomic disparities in colon cancer screening, diagnosis, and care. We collected data from the medical records of non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White patients aged ≥50 and diagnosed with colon cancer from October 2010 through January 2014 (N = 348). We used logistic regression with marginal standardization to model associations between health insurance status and study outcomes. RESULTS: After adjusting for age, race, sex, and socioeconomic status, being continuously insured 5 years before diagnosis and through diagnosis was associated with a 20 (95% CI, 8-33) percentage-point increase in prevalence of screen detection. Screen detection in turn was associated with a 15 (95% CI, 3-27) percentage-point increase in early-stage diagnosis; however, nearly half (47%; n = 54) of the 114 screen-detected patients were still diagnosed at late stage (stage 3 or 4). Health insurance status was not associated with earlier stage at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: For health insurance to effectively shift stage at diagnosis, stronger associations are needed between health insurance and screening-related detection; between screening-related detection and early stage at diagnosis; or both. Findings also highlight the need to better understand factors contributing to late-stage colon cancer diagnosis despite screen detection.

Assessment of a Risk-Based Approach for Triaging Mammography Examinations During Periods of Reduced Capacity.

Importance: Breast cancer screening, surveillance, and diagnostic imaging services were profoundly limited during the initial phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Objective: To develop a risk-based strategy for triaging mammograms during periods of decreased capacity. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used data collected prospectively from mammography examinations performed in 2014 to 2019 at 92 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Participants included individuals undergoing mammography. Data were analyzed from August 10 to November 3, 2020. Exposures: Clinical indication for screening, breast symptoms, personal history of breast cancer, age, time since last mammogram/screening interval, family history of breast cancer, breast density, and history of high-risk breast lesion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Combinations of clinical indication, clinical history, and breast cancer risk factors that subdivided mammograms into risk groups according to their cancer detection rate were identified using classification and regression trees. Results: The cohort included 898 415 individuals contributing 1 878 924 mammograms (mean [SD] age at mammogram, 58.6 [11.2] years) interpreted by 448 radiologists, with 1 722 820 mammograms in individuals without a personal history of breast cancer and 156 104 mammograms in individuals with a history of breast cancer. Most individuals were aged 50 to 69 years at imaging (1 113 174 mammograms [59.2%]), and 204 305 (11.2%) were Black, 206 087 (11.3%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 126 677 (7.0%) were Hispanic or Latina, and 40 021 (2.2%) were another race/ethnicity or mixed race/ethnicity. Cancer detection rates varied widely based on clinical indication, breast symptoms, personal history of breast cancer, and age. The 12% of mammograms with very high (89.6 [95% CI, 82.3-97.5] to 122.3 [95% CI, 108.1-138.0] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) or high (36.1 [95% CI, 33.1-39.3] to 47.5 [95% CI, 42.4-53.3] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) cancer detection rates accounted for 55% of all detected cancers and included mammograms to evaluate an abnormal mammogram or breast lump in individuals of all ages regardless of breast cancer history, to evaluate breast symptoms other than lump in individuals with a breast cancer history or without a history but aged 60 years or older, and for short-interval follow-up in individuals aged 60 years or older without a breast cancer history. The 44.2% of mammograms with very low cancer detection rates accounted for 13.1% of detected cancers and included annual screening mammograms in individuals aged 50 to 69 years (3.8 [95% CI, 3.5-4.1] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms) and all screening mammograms in individuals younger than 50 years regardless of screening interval (2.8 [95% CI, 2.6-3.1] cancers detected per 1000 mammograms). Conclusions and Relevance: In this population-based cohort study, clinical indication and individual risk factors were associated with cancer detection and may be useful for prioritizing mammography in times and settings of decreased capacity.

Assessment of Radiologist Performance in Breast Cancer Screening Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography.

Importance: Many US radiologists have screening mammography recall rates above the expert-recommended threshold of 12%. The influence of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) on the distribution of radiologist recall rates is uncertain. Objective: To evaluate radiologists' recall and cancer detection rates before and after beginning interpretation of DBT examinations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 198 radiologists from 104 radiology facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium who interpreted 251 384 DBT and 2 000 681 digital mammography (DM) screening examinations from 2009 to 2017, including 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations during the study period and 72 (36.4%) who exclusively interpreted DM examinations (to adjust for secular trends). Data were analyzed from April 2018 to July 2019. Exposures: Digital breast tomosynthesis and DM screening examinations. Main Outcomes and Measures: Recall rate and cancer detection rate. Results: A total of 198 radiologists interpreted 2 252 065 DM and DBT examinations (2 000 681 [88.8%] DM examinations; 251 384 [11.2%] DBT examinations; 710 934 patients [31.6%] aged 50-59 years; 1 448 981 [64.3%] non-Hispanic white). Among the 126 radiologists (63.6%) who interpreted DBT examinations, 83 (65.9%) had unadjusted DM recall rates of no more than 12% before using DBT, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 10.0% (7.5%-13.0%). On DBT examinations, 96 (76.2%) had an unadjusted recall rate of no more than 12%, with a median (interquartile range) recall rate of 8.8% (6.3%-11.3%). A secular trend in recall rate was observed, with the multivariable-adjusted risk of recall on screening examinations declining by 1.2% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.5%) per year. After adjusting for examination characteristics and secular trends, recall rates were 15% lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87). Adjusted recall rates were significantly lower on DBT examinations compared with DM examinations interpreted before DBT use for 45 radiologists (35.7%) and significantly higher for 18 (14.3%); 63 (50.0%) had no statistically significant change. The unadjusted cancer detection rate on DBT was 5.3 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 5.0-5.7 per 1000 examinations) compared with 4.7 per 1000 examinations (95% CI, 4.6-4.8 per 1000 examinations) on DM examinations interpreted before DM use (multivariable-adjusted risk ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.11-1.33). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, DBT was associated with an overall decrease in recall rate and an increase in cancer detection rate. However, our results indicated that there is wide variability among radiologists, including a subset of radiologists who experienced increased recall rates on DBT examinations. Radiology practices should audit radiologist DBT screening performance and consider additional DBT training for radiologists whose performance does not improve as expected.

Gender- and Race-Based Differences in Barriers and Facilitators to Early Detection of Colon Cancer.

Background: Early detection of colon cancer is essential to successful treatment and survival, yet most patients are diagnosed only after onset of symptoms. Previous studies suggest differences in colon cancer screening and presentation by gender and race, but reasons for this are not understood. The purpose of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators to early detection of colon cancer and to compare by gender and race. Materials and Methods: In the Colon Cancer Patterns of Care in Chicago study, non-Hispanic Black and White (NHB, NHW) patients aged 30-79 newly diagnosed with colon cancer between 2010 and 2014 (n = 249) underwent in-depth semistructured interviews regarding the pathway to colon cancer diagnosis. Mixed qualitative and quantitative methods were used to analyze patient narratives and to compare response patterns by gender and race within prespecified domains: health care access factors, provider-related factors, patient-related factors, and diagnostic workup factors. Results: Women reported more barriers than facilitators to early detection than men (barrier: facilitator ratio of 0.60 vs. 0.48). Thematic differences were seen, with women reporting more barriers related to health care access, scheduling of follow-ups, symptom recognition, and inappropriate or inconclusive diagnostic tests. Fewer women than men reported facilitators related to provider factors such as ease of scheduling follow-ups and receiving referrals for screening or a specialist. NHBs and NHWs reported similar ratios of barriers to facilitators (0.55 vs. 0.53), but more NHBs than NHWs reported barriers related to health care access, scheduling follow-ups, and clinical delays, and fewer NHBs reported facilitators related to health care accessibility (existing relationship with provider, ease of scheduling follow-ups). Conclusions: In this diverse population of patients recently diagnosed with colon cancer, we identified substantive gender- and race-based differences in the types and burden of barriers and facilitators to early detection experienced in the path to diagnosis. These differences should be explored further as they may contribute to disparities in the diagnosis and prognosis of colon cancer.

Population-Based Assessment of the Association Between Magnetic Resonance Imaging Background Parenchymal Enhancement and Future Primary Breast Cancer Risk.

PURPOSE: To evaluate comparative associations of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) and mammographic breast density with subsequent breast cancer risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined women undergoing breast MRI in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium from 2005 to 2015 (with one exam in 2000) using qualitative BPE assessments of minimal, mild, moderate, or marked. Breast density was assessed on mammography performed within 5 years of MRI. Among women diagnosed with breast cancer, the first BPE assessment was included if it was more than 3 months before their first diagnosis. Breast cancer risk associated with BPE was estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 4,247 women, 176 developed breast cancer (invasive, n = 129; ductal carcinoma in situ,n = 47) over a median follow-up time of 2.8 years. More women with cancer had mild, moderate, or marked BPE than women without cancer (80% v 66%, respectively). Compared with minimal BPE, increasing BPE levels were associated with significantly increased cancer risk (mild: hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.87; moderate: HR, 2.42; 95% CI, 1.51 to 3.86; and marked: HR, 3.41; 95% CI, 2.05 to 5.66). Compared with women with minimal BPE and almost entirely fatty or scattered fibroglandular breast density, women with mild, moderate, or marked BPE demonstrated elevated cancer risk if they had almost entirely fatty or scattered fibroglandular breast density (HR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.19 to 4.46) or heterogeneous or extremely dense breasts (HR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.44 to 4.72), with no significant interaction (P = .82). Combined mild, moderate, and marked BPE demonstrated significantly increased risk of invasive cancer (HR, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.66 to 4.49) but not ductal carcinoma in situ (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.72 to 3.05). CONCLUSION: BPE is associated with future invasive breast cancer risk independent of breast density. BPE should be considered for risk prediction models for women undergoing breast MRI.

Multilevel Examination of Health Disparity: The Role of Policy Implementation in Neighborhood Context, in Patient Resources, and in Healthcare Facilities on Later Stage of Breast Cancer Diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: There is a substantial racial/ethnic disparity in female breast cancer mortality in Chicago between non-Hispanic black (NHblack) and Hispanic patients compared with their non-Hispanic white (NHwhite) counterparts. This observation prompted a multilevel examination of factors that might account for the disparity, with the goal of identifying potential policy interventions that might meaningfully address it METHODS: In the Breast Cancer Care in Chicago study, 411 NHblack, 397 NHwhite, and 181 Hispanic patients diagnosed between the ages of 30 and 79 were interviewed, and medical records were abstracted for information on screening and diagnostic follow-up. We conducted a multilevel analysis to assess the role of neighborhood context, patient resources, facility characteristics, and mode of detection in determining the disparity in later stage at diagnosis. RESULTS: After adjustment for neighborhood context, mode of detection, and facility accreditation/resources, there was no significant disparity in later stage breast cancer diagnosis between NHblack or Hispanic patients compared with NHwhite patients. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that racial/ethnic differences in mode of detection and facility accreditation/resources account for most of the disparity in stage at diagnosis. Understanding the causes of differential screen detection and access to highly accredited facilities could inform interventions to meaningfully address this disparity. IMPACT: Multilevel approaches to studying health disparities are becoming the research standard for understanding and addressing health disparities. Optimal design of multilevel interventions addressing disparities in later stage diagnosis would benefit from enhanced understanding of pathways to detection and diagnosis available to patients in medically underserved communities.

Examining racial disparities in colon cancer clinical delay in the Colon Cancer Patterns of Care in Chicago study.

PURPOSE: We explored a potential racial disparity in clinical delay among non-Hispanic (nH) Black and White colon cancer patients and examined factors that might account for the observed disparity. METHODS: Patients aged 30-79 years with a newly diagnosed colon cancer from 2010 to 2014 (n = 386) were recruited from a diverse sample of nine public, private, and academic hospitals in and around Chicago. Prolonged clinical delay was defined as 60 days or more or 90 days or more between medical presentation (symptoms or a screen-detected lesion) and treatment initiation (surgery or chemotherapy). Multivariable logistic regression with model-based standardization was used to estimate the disparity as a difference in prevalence of prolonged delay by race. RESULTS: Prevalence of delay in excess of 60 days was 12 percentage points (95% confidence interval: 2%, 22%) higher among nH Blacks versus Whites after adjusting for age, facility, and county of residence. Travel burden (time and distance traveled from residence to facility) explained roughly one-third of the disparity (33%, P = .05), individual and area-level socioeconomic status measures explained roughly one-half (51%, P = .21), and socioeconomic measures together with travel burden explained roughly four-fifths (79%, P = .08). CONCLUSIONS: Low socioeconomic status and increased travel burden are barriers to care disproportionately experienced by nH Black colon cancer patients.

Racial disparity in survival from estrogen and progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer: implications for reducing breast cancer mortality disparities.

INTRODUCTION: Non-Latina black breast cancer patients experience a shorter survival from breast cancer than their non-Latina white counterparts. We compared breast cancer-specific survival for the subset of black and white patients with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive tumors that are generally targeted with endocrine therapy. METHODS: Using data collected from a population-based cohort of breast cancer patients from Chicago, IL, Kaplan-Meier survival curves and hazard functions were generated and proportional hazards models were estimated to determine the black/white disparity in time to death from breast cancer while adjusting for age at diagnosis, patient characteristics, treatment-related variables, and tumor grade and stage. RESULTS: In regression models, hazard of breast cancer death among ER/PR-positive patients was at least 4 times higher for black than for white patients in all models tested. Notably, even after adjusting for stage at diagnosis, tumor grade, and treatment variables (including initiation of systemic adjuvant therapies), the hazard ratio for death from ER/PR-positive breast cancer between black and white women was 4.39 (95% CI 1.76, 10.9, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a racial disparity in breast cancer survival for patients diagnosed with ER/PR-positive tumors that did not appear to be due to differences in tumor stage, grade, or therapy initiation in black patients, suggesting that there may be racial differences in the molecular characteristics of hormone receptor-positive tumors, such that ER/PR-positive tumors in black patients may be less responsive to standard treatments.

Mediation of Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Estrogen/Progesterone Receptor-Negative Breast Cancer by Socioeconomic Position and Reproductive Factors.

Hispanic and non-Hispanic black breast cancer patients are more likely than non-Hispanic white patients to be diagnosed with breast cancer that is negative for estrogen and progesterone receptors (ER/PR-negative). This disparity might be transmitted through socioeconomic and reproductive factors. Data on 746 recently diagnosed breast cancer patients (300 non-Hispanic white, 303 non-Hispanic black, 143 Hispanic) were obtained from the population-based Breast Cancer Care in Chicago Study (Chicago, Illinois, 2005-2008). Income, educational level, and census tract measures of concentrated disadvantage and affluence were combined into a single measure of socioeconomic position (SEP). Parity and age at first birth were combined into a single measure of reproductive factors (RPF). We constructed path models to estimate direct and indirect associations of SEP and RPF, and we estimated average marginal controlled direct associations. Compared with non-Hispanic white patients, non-Hispanic black patients and Hispanic patients were more likely to have ER/PR-negative disease (28% and 20% for non-Hispanic black patients and Hispanic patients, respectively, vs. 12% for non-Hispanic white patients; P ≤ 0.001). The ethnic disparity in ER/PR-negative breast cancer (prevalence difference = 0.13, 95% confidence interval: 0.07, 0.18) was reduced by approximately 60% (prevalence difference = 0.05, 95% confidence interval: -0.04, 0.13) after control for SEP and RPF. At least part of the ethnic disparity in the aggressiveness of breast tumors might be transmitted through social influences on tumor biology.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Time to a Breast Cancer Diagnosis: The Mediating Effects of Health Care Facility Factors.

BACKGROUND: Racial/ethnic disparities exist along the breast cancer continuum, including time to a diagnosis. Previous research has largely focused on patient-level factors, and less is known about the role that health care facilities may play in delayed breast cancer care. OBJECTIVES: We examined racial/ethnic disparities in delayed diagnosis for breast cancer in the Breast Cancer Care in Chicago Study and estimated the potential mediating effects of facility factors. RESEARCH DESIGN AND SUBJECTS: Breast cancer patients (N=606) contributed interview and medical record data as part of a population-based study. MEASURES: Race/ethnicity was self-reported at interview. Diagnostic delay was defined as an excess of 60 days between medical presentation and a definitive diagnosis. Facility factors included the facility of medical presentation with respect to: (1) accreditation through the National Consortium of Breast Centers; (2) certification as a Breast Imaging Center of Excellence through the American College of Radiology; and (3) status as a disproportionate share hospital through the state of Illinois as well as the number of facilities used between presentation and diagnosis. RESULTS: Relative to non-Hispanic whites, minorities were more likely to experience a diagnostic delay, present at a nonaccredited facility and at a disproportionate share hospital, and involve multiple facilities in their diagnosis. Together, facility factors accounted for 43% of the disparity in diagnostic delay (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Initial presentation of breast cancer at higher resourced facilities can reduce diagnostic delays. Disparities in delay are partly due to a disproportionate presentation at lower resourced facilities by minorities.

Assessing the quality of race/ethnicity, tumor, and breast cancer treatment information in a non-SEER state registry.

INTRODUCTION: The quality of population-based cancer registries are largely defined by the completeness, accuracy, and timeliness of incident cases and demographics reported. However, both Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registries and non-SEER population-based state cancer registries have been regularly used to examine treatment patterns. While the quality of treatment data in SEER cancer registries has often been examined and improved, the quality of such data in non-SEER state registries has rarely been assessed. METHODS: We used self-reported (SR) and medical record (MR) abstracted data from a population-based breast cancer study for comparison with information contained in the Illinois State Cancer Registry (registry). Using either MR or SR as the gold standard, we estimated concordance, kappa, and sensitivity for the presence or absence of surgery and initiation of chemotherapy, radiation and hormone therapy, as well as tumor characteristics, race/ethnicity and insurance status. RESULTS: The accuracy of most of the data elements examined was generally high. For instance, there was almost perfect agreement between SR race/ethnicity and registry documentation (k = 0.92). MR and registry data on tumor stage, grade, ER/PR status, and node status had substantial agreement (k = 0.78-0.88). In regard to treatment information, surgery was rarely underdocumented in registry data, while radiation and chemotherapy were modestly underdocumented (8 percent-16 percent). On the other hand, per SR or MR, the registry generally failed to document hormonal treatment in a large proportion of cases (0.38 and 0.52, respectively). Health insurance information in the registry was also not well documented. There was only moderate agreement (k = 0.41) between SR and registry health insurance status, with uninsured patients being the least likely to be documented as such in the registry (sensitivity = 0.37 vs 0.96 and 0.63 for public and private insurance status, respectively). DISCUSSION: While some registry data elements are quite reliable, others warrant concern and must be interpreted with great caution. Understanding the strengths and limitations of a population-based non-SEER state cancer registry data can be useful to researchers who use these data sources to examine population cancer patterns or carry out cancer studies.

Potentially missed detection with screening mammography: does the quality of radiologist's interpretation vary by patient socioeconomic advantage/disadvantage?

PURPOSE: We examined whether quality of mammography interpretation as performed by the original reading radiologist varied by patient sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS: For 149 patients residing in Chicago and diagnosed in 2005-2008, we obtained the original index mammogram that detected the breast cancer and at least one prior mammogram that did not detect the cancer performed within 2 years of the index mammogram. A single breast imaging specialist performed a blinded review of the prior mammogram. Potentially missed detection (PMD) was defined as an actionable lesion seen during a blinded review of the prior mammogram that was in the same quadrant as the cancer on the index mammogram. RESULTS: Of 149 prior mammograms originally read as nonmalignant, 46% (N = 68) had a potentially detectable lesion. In unadjusted analyses, PMD was greater among minority patients (54% vs. 39%, P = .07) and for patients with incomes below $30,000 (65% vs. 36%, P < .01), less education (58% vs. 39%, P = .02), and lacking private health insurance (63% vs. 40%, P = .02). Likelihood ratio tests for the inclusion of socioeconomic variables in multivariable logistic regression models were highly significant (P ≤ .02). CONCLUSIONS: Disadvantaged socioeconomic status appears to be associated with PMD of breast cancer at mammography screening.

Disparities in screening mammography services by race/ethnicity and health insurance.

BACKGROUND: Black and Hispanic women are diagnosed at a later stage of breast cancer than white women. Differential access to specialists, diffusion of technology, and affiliation with an academic medical center may be related to this stage disparity. METHODS: We analyzed data from a mammography facility survey for the metropolitan region of Chicago, Illinois, to assess in part whether quality breast imaging services were equally accessed by non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Hispanic women and by women with and without private insurance. Of 49 screening facilities within the city of Chicago, 43 facilities completed the survey, and 40 facilities representing about 149,000 mammograms, including all major academic facilities, provided data on patient race/ethnicity. RESULTS: Among women receiving mammograms at the facilities we studied, white women were more likely than black or Hispanic women to have mammograms at academic facilities, at facilities that relied exclusively on breast imaging specialists to read mammograms, and at facilities where digital mammography was available (p<0.001). Women with private insurance were similarly more likely than women without private insurance to have mammograms at facilities with these characteristics (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Black and Hispanic women and women without private insurance are more likely than white women and women with private insurance to obtain mammography screening at facilities with less favorable characteristics. A disparity in use of high-quality mammography may be contributing to disparities in breast cancer mortality.

Challenges for multilevel health disparities research in a transdisciplinary environment.

Numerous factors play a part in health disparities. Although health disparities are manifested at the level of the individual, other contexts should be considered when investigating the associations of disparities with clinical outcomes. These contexts include families, neighborhoods, social organizations, and healthcare facilities. This paper reports on health disparities research as a multilevel research domain from the perspective of a large national initiative. The Centers for Population Health and Health Disparities (CPHHD) program was established by the NIH to examine the highly dimensional, complex nature of disparities and their effects on health. Because of its inherently transdisciplinary nature, the CPHHD program provides a unique environment in which to perform multilevel health disparities research. During the course of the program, the CPHHD centers have experienced challenges specific to this type of research. The challenges were categorized along three axes: sources of subjects and data, data characteristics, and multilevel analysis and interpretation. The CPHHDs collectively offer a unique example of how these challenges are met; just as importantly, they reveal a broad range of issues that health disparities researchers should consider as they pursue transdisciplinary investigations in this domain, particularly in the context of a large team science initiative.

Biomarkers of Psychological Stress in Health Disparities Research.

Psychological stress can contribute to health disparities in populations that are confronted with the recurring stress of everyday life. A number of biomarkers have been shown to be affected by psychological stress. These biomarkers include allostatic load, which is a summary measure of the cumulative biological burden of the repeated attempts to adapt to daily stress. Allostatic load includes effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary axis, the sympathetic nervous system and the cardiovascular system. These in turn affect the immune system via bidirectional signaling pathways. Evidence is also building that psychological stress, perhaps via heightened inflammatory states, can increase oxidative stress levels and DNA damage. The inter-relationships of ethnicity, genotype, gene expression and ability to adequately mitigate stress response are just starting to be appreciated. The need to conduct these studies in disadvantaged populations is clear and requires methods to address potential logistical barriers. Biomarkers can help characterize and quantify the biological impact of psychological stress on the etiology of health disparities.

Validating cancer histories in deceased relatives.

BACKGROUND: A family history of cancer is a marker of familially shared genetic and environmental risk factors for cancer but is subject to inaccurate and biased reporting. METHODS: In a case-control study of adult acute leukemia, we examined the accuracy of cancer reports in deceased first-degree relatives using death certificates and the National Death Index (NDI). We submitted information on 1058 deceased relatives to the NDI or civil vital statistics registries. Social security numbers were not available and identifying information was incomplete. RESULTS: A death certificate was located for 70% of records sent to state registries but for only 32% of records submitted to the NDI. Death certificates confirmed 95% of relatives reported to be cancer-free and 83% of those reported to have any form of cancer. Confirmation of cancer of specific sites ranged from 50% for breast cancer and 54% for leukemia to 86% for prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: State searches may be preferable to the NDI when identifying information is incomplete.