RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer are often advised to begin screening when they are 10 years younger than the age at which their relative was diagnosed. Evidence is lacking to determine how much earlier they should begin. METHODS: Using Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data on screening mammograms from 1996 to 2016, the authors constructed a cohort of 306,147 women 30-59 years of age with information on first-degree family history of breast cancer and relative's age at diagnosis. The authors compared cumulative 5-year breast cancer incidence among women with and without a first-degree family history of breast by relative's age at diagnosis and by screening age. RESULTS: Among 306,147 women included in the study, approximately 11% reported a first-degree family history of breast cancer with 3885 breast cancer cases identified. Women reporting a relative diagnosed between 40 and 49 years and undergoing screening between ages 30 and 39 or 40 and 49 had similar 5-year cumulative incidences of breast cancer (respectively, 18.6/1000; 95% confidence interval [CI], 12.1, 25.7; 18.4/1000; 95% CI, 13.7, 23.5) as women without a family history undergoing screening between 50-59 years of age (18.0/1000; 95% CI, 17.0, 19.1). For relative's diagnosis age from 35 to 45 years of age, initiating screening 5-8 years before diagnosis age resulted in a 5-year cumulative incidence of breast cancer of 15.2/1000, that of an average 50-year-old woman. CONCLUSION: Women with a relative diagnosed at or before age 45 may wish to consider, in consultation with their provider, initiating screening 5-8 years earlier than their relative's diagnosis age.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Femenino , Humanos , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/genética , Incidencia , Mamografía/métodos , Anamnesis , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
PURPOSE: We evaluated self-report of decision quality and regret with breast cancer surgical treatment by pre-operative breast MRI use in women recently diagnosed with breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a survey with 957 women aged 18 + with stage 0-III breast cancer identified in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Participants self-reported receipt of pre-operative breast MRI. Primary outcomes were process measures in the Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Quality Instrument (BCS-DQI) (continuous outcome) and Decision Regret Scale (dichotomized outcome as any/none). Generalized estimating equations with linear and logit link were used to estimate adjusted associations between breast MRI and primary outcomes. All analyses were also stratified by breast density. RESULTS: Survey participation rate was 27.9% (957/3430). Study population was primarily > 60 years, White, college educated, and diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Pre-operative breast MRI was reported in 46% of women. A higher proportion of women who were younger age (< 50 years), commercially insured, and self-detected their breast cancer reported pre-operative breast MRI use. In adjusted analysis, pre-operative breast MRI use compared with no use was associated with a small but statistically significantly higher decision quality scores (69.5 vs 64.7, p-value = 0.043). Decision regret did not significantly differ in women who reported pre-operative breast MRI use compared with no use (54.2% v. 48.7%, respectively, p-value = 0.11). Study results did not vary when stratified by breast density for either primary outcome. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Breast MRI use in the diagnostic work-up of breast cancer does not negatively alter women's perceptions of surgical treatment decisions in early survivorship. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03029286.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Densidad de la Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Toma de Decisiones , Emociones , Femenino , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , MastectomíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Women with a first-degree family history of breast cancer (FHBC) are sometimes advised to initiate screening mammography when they are 10 years younger than the age at which their youngest relative was diagnosed, despite a lack of unambiguous evidence that this is an effective strategy. It is unknown how often this results in women initiating screening earlier (< 40 years) than screening guidelines recommend for average-risk women. METHODS: We examined screening initiation age by FHBC and age at diagnosis of the youngest relative using data collected by the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium on 74,838 first screening mammograms performed between 1996 and 2016. RESULTS: Of the 74,838 women included in the study, nearly 9% reported a FHBC. Approximately 16.8% of women who initiated mammography before 40 years reported a FHBC. More women with a FHBC than without initiated screening < 40 years (48% vs. 23%, respectively). Among women with a FHBC who initiated screening < 40 years, 65% were 10 years younger than the age at which their relative was diagnosed. CONCLUSION: Women with a first-degree relative diagnosed with breast cancer were more likely to start screening before 40 years than women reporting no FHBC, especially if their relative was diagnosed before 50 years.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Familia , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía/estadística & datos numéricos , Anamnesis , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Many patients with cancer seek care for pain in the emergency department (ED). Prospective research on cancer pain in this setting has historically been insufficient. We conducted this study to describe the reported pain among cancer patients presenting to the ED, how pain is managed, and how pain may be associated with clinical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cohort study on adult patients with active cancer presenting to 18 EDs in the USA. We reported pain scores, response to medication, and analgesic utilization. We estimated the associations between pain severity, medication utilization, and the following outcomes: 30-day mortality, 30-day hospital readmission, and ED disposition. RESULTS: The study population included 1075 participants. Those who received an opioid in the ED were more likely to be admitted to the hospital and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (OR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.88) and OR 1.56 (95% CI: 1.17, 2.07)), respectively. Severe pain at ED presentation was associated with increased 30-day mortality (OR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.05, 5.02), though this risk was attenuated when adjusting for clinical factors (most notably functional status). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe pain had a higher risk of mortality, which was attenuated when correcting for clinical characteristics. Those patients who required opioid analgesics in the ED were more likely to require admission and were more at risk of 30-day hospital readmission. Future efforts should focus on these at-risk groups, who may benefit from additional services including palliative care, hospice, or home-health services.
Asunto(s)
Analgésicos/uso terapéutico , Dolor en Cáncer/tratamiento farmacológico , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitalización/estadística & datos numéricos , Manejo del Dolor/métodos , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Dolor en Cáncer/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oportunidad Relativa , Manejo del Dolor/mortalidad , Dimensión del Dolor , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Prospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the use of opioids and other medications in a cohort of older adults was associated with self-reported health status. METHODS: Among participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) Screening Trial linked to Medicare Part D claims data and answering a quality-of-life questionnaire, we examined the relationship between medication use over a 5-year period and various self-reported health status variables assessed several years later, including overall health status (STATUS) and trouble with activities of daily living (TADL). Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for the health status variables and metrics of medication use, including >60-day use, and for opiates, chronic use, with models controlling for demographics (model I), additionally for chronic conditions (model II), and additionally for other medication use (model III). RESULTS: The study cohort included 22,844 PLCO participants (56% women, 90% non-Hispanic whites); 4.2% had chronic opioid use and 12.5% used for >60 days. Fair-poor STATUS was reported in 37.9% of participants with chronic opioid use versus 15.0% of participants without (p < 0.001). ORs for chronic opioid use for fair-poor STATUS (compared to good-excellent) were significantly elevated in all models but decreased from model I (OR = 3.6; 95% CI :3.1-4.1) to model II (OR = 2.7; 95% CI :2.3-3.1) to model III (OR = 2.1; 95% CI :1.8-2.5). ORs for TADL were generally similar to those for STATUS. Other drug classes also had significantly elevated model III ORs for fair-poor versus good-excellent STATUS (range 1.1-1.6). CONCLUSION: Frequent use of various medication classes correlated with measures of future health status in an elderly population, with opioids having the strongest association. The magnitude of the association decreased after controlling for concurrent chronic conditions but remained elevated. Future research should consider how the use of opioids and other medications impact measures of health-related quality of life.
Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides , Medicare Part D , Actividades Cotidianas , Anciano , Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Femenino , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Calidad de Vida , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with active cancer account for a growing percentage of all emergency department (ED) visits and have a unique set of risks related to their disease and its treatments. Effective triage for this population is fundamental to facilitating their emergency care. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the validity of the Emergency Severity Index (ESI; version 4) triage tool to predict ED-relevant outcomes among adult patients with active cancer. METHODS: We conducted a prespecified analysis of the observational cohort established by the National Cancer Institute-supported Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network's multicenter (18 sites) study of ED visits by patients with active cancer (N = 1075). We used a series of χ2 tests for independence to relate ESI scores with 1) disposition, 2) ED resource use, 3) hospital length of stay, and 4) 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Among the 1008 subjects included in this analysis, the ESI distribution skewed heavily toward high acuity (>95% of subjects had an ESI level of 1, 2, or 3). ESI was significantly associated with patient disposition and ED resource use (p values < 0.05). No significant associations were observed between ESI and the non-ED based outcomes of hospital length of stay or 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: ESI scores among ED patients with active cancer indicate higher acuity than the general ED population and are predictive of disposition and ED resource use. These findings show that the ESI is a valid triage tool for use in this population for outcomes directly relevant to ED care.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias/terapia , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Triaje/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/diagnóstico , Neoplasias/mortalidad , Estudios Prospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine whether the technologist has an effect on the radiologists' interpretative performance of diagnostic mammography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using data from a community-based mammography registry from 1994 to 2009, we identified 162,755 diagnostic mammograms interpreted by 286 radiologists and performed by 303 mammographic technologists. We calculated sensitivity, false-positive rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) of the recommendation for biopsy from mammography for examinations performed (i.e., images acquired) by each mammographic technologist, separately for conventional (film-screen) and digital modalities. We assessed the variability of these performance measures among mammographic technologists, using mixed effects logistic regression and taking into account the clustering of examinations within women, radiologists, and radiology practices. RESULTS: Among the 291 technologists performing conventional examinations, mean sensitivity of the examinations performed was 83.0% (95% CI, 80.8-85.2%), mean false-positive rate was 8.5% (95% CI, 8.0-9.0%), and mean PPV of the recommendation for biopsy from mammography was 27.1% (95% CI, 24.8-29.4%). For the 45 technologists performing digital examinations, mean sensitivity of the examinations they performed was 79.6% (95% CI, 73.1-86.2%), mean false-positive rate was 8.8% (95% CI, 7.5-10.0%), and mean PPV of the recommendation for biopsy from mammography was 23.6% (95% CI, 18.8-28.4%). We found significant variation by technologist in the sensitivity, false-positive rate, and PPV of the recommendation for biopsy from mammography for conventional but not digital mammography (p < 0.0001 for all three interpretive performance measures). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that the technologist has an influence on radiologists' interpretive performance for diagnostic conventional but not digital mammography. Future studies should examine why this difference between modalities exists and determine if similar patterns are observed for screening mammography.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico por imagen , Competencia Clínica , Relaciones Interprofesionales , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Tecnología Radiológica , Biopsia , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Reacciones Falso Positivas , Femenino , Humanos , Mamografía , Tamizaje Masivo , Variaciones Dependientes del Observador , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Sistema de Registros , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study characterizes the surgical oncology workforce as a baseline for future workforce projections. BACKGROUND: Measuring the capacity of the surgical oncology workforce is difficult due to the wide variety of surgeons who contribute to surgical cancer care. We hypothesize that the bulk of surgical oncology care is provided by general surgeons. METHODS: Using Medicare claims data linked to the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry, all patients 65 years or older who had a diagnosis of incident cancer of the bladder, breast, colon/rectum, esophagus, gallbladder, kidney, liver, lung, skin (melanoma-only), ovary, pancreas, prostate, small bowel, stomach, or uterus in 2005 and who underwent an extirpative procedure for cancer were identified. The proportion of procedures performed by different types of providers was examined. RESULTS: A total of 7759 patients underwent 16,734 extirpative surgical procedures. Excluding procedures for gynecologic/urologic malignancies, the proportion of procedures performed by general surgeons and surgical oncologists was 48% and 12%, respectively. Patients treated by general surgeons were more likely to be older, female, minority, and from areas of high poverty. For each tumor type, travel distances were shorter for patients treated by general surgeons than those treated by specialists. CONCLUSIONS: Workforce projections must account for the significant overlap in the scope of services delivered by providers of different specialties and for the large contribution of general surgeons to cancer care. Efforts to improve the quality of cancer care need to move beyond centralization and focus on educating the surgeons who are providing the bulk of oncology care.
Asunto(s)
Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud , Fuerza Laboral en Salud/tendencias , Oncología Médica , Neoplasias/cirugía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , North Carolina , Estudios Retrospectivos , Programa de VERF , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Distance to oncology service providers and rurality may affect receipt of guideline-recommended radiation therapy (RT), but the extent to which these factors affect the care of Medicare-insured patients is unknown. METHODS: Using cancer registry data linked to Medicare claims from the Integrated Cancer Information and Surveillance System (ICISS), we identified all women aged 65 years or older who were diagnosed with stage I, II, or III breast cancer from 2003 through 2005, who had Medicare claims through 2006, and who were clinically eligible for RT. We geocoded the address of each RT service provider's practice location and calculated the travel distance from each patient's residential address to the nearest RT provider. We used ZIP codes to classify each patient's residence as rural or urban according to rural- urban commuting area codes. We used generalized estimating equations models with county-level clustering and interaction terms between distance categories and rural-urban status to estimate the effect of distance to care and rural-urban status on receipt of RT. RESULTS: In urban areas, increasing distance to the nearest RT provider was associated with a lower likelihood of receiving RT (odds ratio [OR] = 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.97) for those living more than 20 miles from the nearest RT provider compared with those living less than 10 miles away. In rural areas, those living within 10-20 miles of the nearest RT provider were more likely to receive RT than those living less than 10 miles away (OR = 1.73; 95% CI, 1.08-2.76). LIMITATIONS: Results may not be generalizable to areas outside North Carolina or to non-Medicare populations. CONCLUSION: Coordinated outreach programs targeted differently to rural and urban patients may be necessary to improve the quality of oncology care.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama/radioterapia , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Características de la Residencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Disparidades en Atención de Salud , Humanos , Medicare , North Carolina , Oportunidad Relativa , Población Rural/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos , Población Urbana/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
We conducted a cross-sectional multi-center study to compare the demographics, clinical characteristics, and lung cancer screening (LCS) results among those eligible for LCS per 2013 vs 2021 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations. Statistical tests are two-sided, with p < .05 considered statistically significant. Among 17,702 screened individuals (85.2% 2013 Eligible, 14.8% 2021 Newly Eligible), a higher proportion of those screened per 2021 vs 2013 criteria were female (56.1% vs 48.1%, p < .0001) and non-Hispanic Black (19.3% vs 13.4%, p < .0001). The risk of developing and dying from lung cancer per 1000 was statistically significantly higher among those eligible per 2013 vs 2021 criteria. A higher proportion of LCS exams had an increased suspicion of lung cancer in the 2013 vs 2021 criteria groups. Our data suggest that, as intended, updated 2021 USPSTF recommendations are leading to a higher proportion of LCS exams among non-Hispanic Black individuals and women.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Understanding how incentives and their timing influence study enrollment rates is important to efficient study design and increasing the generalizability of findings. This 2-arm, parallel randomized trial evaluated how conditional vs. unconditional mailed incentives of a $20 gift card affected study enrollment in a sample of participants screened for lung cancer screening. METHODS: Eligible participants included Black and White adults who underwent lung cancer screening with low-dose CT and had negative screening results at two North Carolina imaging facilities in 2018. We used a stratified randomization scheme, by sex and race, to assign incentive type (conditional vs. unconditional). We used the Tailored Design Method with six points of mailed contact to engage participants. We compared study enrollment rates using chi-square tests and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: After adjusting for sex, race, age, smoking status, participant residence, and screening site, participants who received unconditional incentives were 74% more likely to enroll than those who received conditional incentives (adjusted OR = 1.74 (95% CI: 1.01, 3.00). CONCLUSIONS: Type of incentive can play a role in increasing study enrollment, especially mailed surveys that target individuals who currently or previously smoked. Unconditional incentives may be worth the initial cost to engage study participants.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Motivación , Adulto , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Servicios Postales , Proyectos de InvestigaciónRESUMEN
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the frequency, components of, and factors associated with shared decision-making (SDM) discussions according to electronic health record (EHR) documentation among individuals undergoing lung cancer screening (LCS). METHODS: A prospective observational cohort study was conducted of individuals undergoing LCS between February 2015 and June 2020 at four LCS centers. The primary outcome was EHR-documented SDM, defined using Medicare-designated components. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to examine predictors of EHR-documented SDM. A secondary outcome was agreement of individual's self-report of SDM and EHR-documented SDM, evaluated using Cohen's κ statistic. RESULTS: Among screened individuals, 41.9% (243 of 580) had EHR-documented SDM, and 71.1% (295 of 415) had self-reported SDM. Decision aids were used in 55.6% of EHR-documented SDM encounters (135 of 243), and 21.8% of documented SDM encounters (53 of 243) included all Medicare-designated components. SDM was documented more frequently in individuals with body mass index ≥ 25 versus <25 kg/m2 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-2.52) and in currently versus formerly smoking individuals (aOR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.02-2.32). Nonpulmonary referring clinicians were less likely to document SDM than pulmonary clinicians (internal medicine: aOR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.18-0.53; family medicine: aOR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.04-0.14; other specialties: aOR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.03-0.21). In a subset of 415 individuals, there was little agreement between individual self-report of SDM and EHR-documented SDM (κ = 0.184), with variation in agreement on the basis of referring clinician specialty. CONCLUSIONS: Although EHR-documented SDM occurred in fewer than half of individuals undergoing LCS, self-reported SDM rates were higher, suggesting that SDM may be underdocumented in the EHR. In addition, EHR-documented SDM was more likely in individuals with higher body mass index and those referred for LCS by pulmonary clinicians. These findings indicate areas for improvement in the implementation and documentation of SDM.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Toma de Decisiones , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagen , Medicare , Participación del Paciente , Estudios Prospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Importance: Maximizing benefits of lung cancer screening requires timely follow-up after a positive screening test. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Lung CT Screening Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) recommends testing and follow-up timing based on the screening result. Objective: To determine rates of and factors associated with recommended follow-up after a positive lung cancer screening examination by Lung-RADS category. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study of lung cancer screening examinations performed from January 1, 2015, through July 31, 2020, with follow-up through July 31, 2021, was conducted at 5 academic and community lung cancer screening sites in North Carolina. Participants included 685 adults with a positive screening examination, Lung-RADS categories 3, 4A, 4B, or 4X. Statistical analysis was performed from December 2020 to March 2022. Exposures: Individual age, race, sex, smoking exposure, year of lung cancer screening examination, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, body mass index, referring clinician specialty, rural or urban residence. Main Outcomes and Measures: Adherence, defined as receipt of recommended follow-up test or procedure after the positive screen per ACR Lung-RADS timeframes: 6 months for Lung-RADS 3 and 3 months for Lung-RADS 4A. For Lung-RADS 4B or 4X, adherence was defined as follow-up care within 4 weeks, as ACR Lung-RADS does not specify a timeframe. Results: Among the 685 individuals included in this study who underwent lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography, 416 (60.7%) were aged at least 65 years, 123 (18.0%) were Black, 562 (82.0%) were White, and 352 (51.4%) were male. Overall adherence to recommended follow-up was 42.6% (292 of 685) and varied by Lung-RADS category: Lung-RADS 3 = 30.0% (109 of 363), Lung-RADS 4A = 49.5% (96 of 194), Lung-RADS 4B or 4X = 68.0% (87 of 128). Extending the follow-up time increased adherence: Lung-RADS 3 = 68.6% (249 of 363) within 9 months, Lung-RADS 4A = 77.3% (150 of 194) within 5 months, and Lung-RADS 4B or 4X = 80.5% (103 of 128) within 62 days. For Lung-RADS 3, recommended follow-up was less likely among those currently smoking vs those who quit (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.48; 95% CI, 0.29-0.78). In Lung-RADS 4A, recommended follow-up was less likely in Black individuals vs White individuals (aOR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.15-0.86). For Lung-RADS 4B or 4X, recommended follow-up was more likely in female individuals vs male individuals (aOR, 2.82; 95% CI, 1.09-7.28) and less likely in those currently smoking vs those who quit (aOR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.12-0.80). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, adherence to recommended follow-up after a positive screening examination was low but improved among nodules with a higher suspicion of cancer and after extending the follow-up timeline. However, the association of extending the follow-up time of screen-detected nodules with outcomes at the population level, outside of a clinical trial, is unknown. These findings suggest that studies to understand why recommended follow-up is lower in Black individuals, male individuals, and individuals currently smoking are needed to develop strategies to improve adherence.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Cuidados Posteriores , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios de CohortesRESUMEN
Importance: Comorbidities characterize the underlying health status of individuals. In the context of lung cancer screening (LCS), lung-related comorbidities may influence the observed benefits and harms. Objective: To compare the characteristics of individuals undergoing LCS, the LCS examination result, the cancer detection rate (CDR), and the false-positive rate (FPR) in those with and without lung-related comorbidities. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 5 academic and community screening sites across North Carolina from January 1, 2014, to November 7, 2020. Participants included 611 individuals screened for lung cancer who completed a 1-page health history questionnaire. Exposures: Presence of at least 1 self-reported lung-related comorbidity, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic bronchitis, emphysema, asthma, bronchiectasis, pulmonary fibrosis, silicosis, asbestosis, sarcoidosis, and tuberculosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The LCS examination result was determined from the radiologist's Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System assessment (negative, 1 or 2; positive, 3 or 4). The age-adjusted CDR and FPR were calculated per 100 LCS examinations, using binary logistic regression. Results: Among the 611 individuals screened for lung cancer (308 men [50.4%]; mean [SD] age, 64 [6.2] years), 335 (54.8%) had at least 1 lung-related comorbidity. Individuals with vs without lung-related comorbidities were more likely to be female than male (180 of 335 [53.7%] vs 123 of 276 [44.6%]; P = .02), White vs non-White race (275 of 326 [84.4%] vs 193 of 272 [71.0%]; P < .001), and have high school or less education vs greater than a high school education (108 of 231 [46.7%] vs 64 of 208 [30.8%]; P = .001). There were no significant differences in the proportion of positive LCS examinations in those with vs without a lung-related comorbidity at baseline (37 [16.0%] vs 22 [11.1%]; P = .14) or subsequent (40 [12.3%] vs 23 [10.6%]; P = .54) LCS examination. Comparing individuals with vs without lung-related comorbidities, there was no statistically significant difference in the CDR (1.6 vs 1.9 per 100; P = .73) or FPR (13.0 vs 9.3 per 100; P = .16). Of the 17 individuals with lung cancer, 13 patients (76.5%) were diagnosed with stage I lung cancer. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that individuals with self-reported lung-related comorbidities undergoing LCS were more likely to be female, of White race, and have less education than those without lung-related comorbidity. Although no statistically significant differences in the proportion of positive examinations, CDR, or FPR by self-reported lung comorbidities were noted, additional studies with larger numbers of individuals undergoing screening are needed to understand LCS outcomes in those with lung-related comorbidities.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Pulmón , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Emergency department (ED) visits by patients with cancer frequently end in hospitalization. As concerns about ED and hospital crowding increase, observation unit care may be an important strategy to deliver safe and efficient treatment for eligible patients. In this investigation, we compared the prevalence and clinical characteristics of cancer patients who received observation unit care with those who were admitted to the hospital from the ED. METHODS: We performed a multicenter prospective cohort study of patients with cancer presenting to an ED affiliated with one of 18 hospitals of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergency Research Network (CONCERN) between March 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. We compared patient characteristics with the prevalence of observation unit care usage, hospital admission, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 1051 enrolled patients, 596 (56.7%) were admitted as inpatients, and 72 (6.9%) were placed in an observation unit. For patients admitted as inpatients, 23.7% had a length of stay ≤2 days. The conversion rate from observation to inpatient was 17.1% (95% CI 14.6-19.4) among those receiving care in an observation unit. The average observation unit length of stay was 14.7 h. Patient factors associated ED disposition to observation unit care were female gender and low Charlson Comorbidity Index. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, the discrepancy between observation unit care use and short inpatient hospitalization may represent underutilization of this resource and a target for process change.
Asunto(s)
Unidades de Observación Clínica , Neoplasias , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Hospitalización , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias/terapia , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Disparities in care of older adults in cancer treatment trials and emergency department (ED) use exist. This report provides a baseline description of older adults ≥65 years old who present to the ED with active cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Planned secondary analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network observational ED cohort study sponsored by the National Cancer Institute. Of 1564 eligible adults with active cancer, 1075 patients were prospectively enrolled, of which 505 were ≥ 65 years old. We recruited this convenience sample from eighteen participating sites across the United States between February 1, 2016 and January 30, 2017. RESULTS: Compared to cancer patients younger than 65 years of age, older adults were more likely to be transported to the ED by emergency medical services, have a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and be admitted despite no significant difference in acuity as measured by the Emergency Severity Index. Despite the higher admission rate, no significant difference was noted in hospitalization length of stay, 30-day mortality, ED revisit or hospital admission within 30 days after the index visit. Three of the top five ED diagnoses for older adults were symptom-related (fever of other and unknown origin, abdominal and pelvic pain, and pain in throat and chest). Despite this, older adults were less likely to report symptoms and less likely to receive symptomatic treatment for pain and nausea than the younger comparison group. Both younger and older adults reported a higher symptom burden on the patient reported Condensed Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale than to ED providers. When treating suspected infection, no differences were noted in regard to administration of antibiotics in the ED, admissions, or length of stay ≤2 days for those receiving ED antibiotics. DISCUSSION: We identified several differences between older (≥65 years old) and younger adults with active cancer seeking emergency care. Older adults frequently presented for symptom-related diagnoses but received fewer symptomatic interventions in the ED suggesting that important opportunities to improve the care of older adults with cancer in the ED exist.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Neoplasias , Anciano , Antibacterianos , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Neoplasias/terapia , Dolor , Estudios Prospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Background: Older adults with cancer use the emergency department (ED) for acute concerns. Objectives: Characterize the palliative care needs and clinical outcomes of advanced cancer patients in the ED. Design: A planned secondary data analysis of the Comprehensive Oncologic Emergencies Research Network (CONCERN) data. Settings/Subjects: Cancer patients who presented to the 18 CONCERN affiliated EDs in the United States. Measurements: Survey included demographics, cancer type, functional status, symptom burden, palliative and hospice care enrollment, and advance directive code status. Results: Of the total (674/1075, 62.3%) patients had advanced cancer and most were White (78.6%) and female (50.3%); median age was 64 (interquartile range 54-71) years. A small proportion of them were receiving palliative (6.5% [95% confidence interval; CI 3.0-7.6]; p = 0.005) and hospice (1.3% [95% CI 1.0-3.2]; p = 0.52) care and had a higher 30-day mortality rate (8.3%, [95% CI 6.2-10.4]). Conclusions: Patients with advanced cancer continue to present to the ED despite recommendations for early delivery of palliative care.
Asunto(s)
Enfermería de Cuidados Paliativos al Final de la Vida , Neoplasias , Anciano , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/terapia , Cuidados Paliativos , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
The Moms for Moms (M4M) program provides mothers the arena necessary to explore new ideas and definitions about mothering as well as skills and strategies concerning parenting, family management, and healthy habits. A participatory approach has been used to understand the development and implementation of the program from the perspective of the participants and community agency staff in an urban city. This approach provides detailed descriptions and interpretations of the shared beliefs, behaviors, and values of the participants as well as how these attributes are shaped by involvement in M4M. The findings from a needs assessment and program feasibility study conducted from August 2006 to June 2008 are used to inform a recently launched Healthy Lifestyles Initiative at a community-based agency for women, to determine if M4M fits within the culture of the organization and to determine the relevance of participatory methods to engage mothers and community agencies in creating health promotion programming.
Asunto(s)
Promoción de la Salud , Madres , Desarrollo de Programa/métodos , Salud de la Mujer , Femenino , Humanos , Apoyo SocialRESUMEN
Overdiagnosed cancers are those that are screen-detected but never would have been symptomatic during patients' lifetimes. Indolent cancers are overdiagnosed cancers. Non-indolent cancers can be overdiagnosed when patients die of causes other than the screen-detected cancer and would have, in the absence of screening, been asymptomatic and undiagnosed at the time of death. This is termed competing cause of mortality (CCM) overdiagnosis. Deaths soon after screen detection may represent CCM overdiagnosis. We examined time from screen-detection to death among the 35 participants in the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST) low-dose computed tomography arm with screen-detected lung cancer and died of non-lung-cancer causes. Seven participants died within 6 months, and 20 died more than 24 months after diagnosis. Deaths due to non-lung cancer causes soon after screen detection were uncommon, arguing against widespread CCM overdiagnosis in the NLST. However, CCM overdiagnosis is likely more frequent in community-based screening given the higher prevalence of comorbidities.
Asunto(s)
Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Neoplasias Pulmonares , Humanos , Neoplasias Pulmonares/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pulmonares/epidemiología , Tamizaje Masivo , Uso Excesivo de los Servicios de Salud , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dosing limits in opioid clinical practice guidelines in the United States are likely misapplied to cancer patients, however, opioid use may be difficult to ascertain as they are largely excluded from opioid use studies. METHODS: The primary objective was to determine whether cancer patients were more likely to be chronic opioid users after diagnosis. We described prescription opioid use among U.S. older adult cancer patients during two time periods, within 2 years of diagnosis (short-term) and at least 2 years beyond diagnosis (long-term), compared to those without cancer (controls). Among participants in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian (PLCO) screening trial with linkages to Medicare Part D data during 2011-2015, we used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the association between cancer diagnosis and opioid use outcomes controlling for demographics. The primary outcome of opioid use was measured with the following metrics: Any opioid use, chronic use (90 consecutive days supply of opioid use while allowing for a 7-day gap between refills), high use (average daily morphine equivalent (MME) ≥120 mg for any 90-day period), and total MME dose above 2,000 mg (MME2000 ). RESULTS: The short-term cohort included 1,491 cancer patients and 24,930 controls. Any use in the 2-year post-diagnosis period was higher among cancer patients OR 3.3 (95% CI: 3.0-3.7). Chronic use rates were similar by cancer status (4.6% vs. 3.8% for cases and controls, respectively). The long-term cohort included 4,377 cancer patients and 27,545 controls. Rates of any use were similar among cancer patients and controls (63% vs. 59%). CONCLUSIONS: Any opioid use was similar among long-term cancer survivors compared to controls, but differed among short-term survivors for any opioid use and marginally for chronic opioid use.