Reproductive Factors Related to Childbearing and a Novel Automated Mammographic Measure, V.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the associations between several reproductive factors related to childbearing and the variation (V) measure (a novel, objective, single summary measure of breast image intensity) by menopausal status. METHODS: Our study included 3,814 cancer-free women within the Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and NHSII cohorts. The data on reproductive variables and covariates were obtained from biennial questionnaires closest to the mammogram date. V-measures were obtained from mammographic images using a previously developed algorithm capturing the standard deviation of pixel values. We used multivariate linear regression to examine the associations of parity, age at first birth, time between menarche and first birth, time since last pregnancy, and lifetime breastfeeding duration with V-measure, adjusting for breast cancer risk factors, including the percentage of mammographic density (PMD). We further examined whether these associations were statistically accounted for (mediated) by PMD. RESULTS: Among premenopausal women, none of the reproductive factors were associated with V. Among postmenopausal women, inverse associations of parity and positive associations of age at first birth with V were mediated by PMD (percent mediated: nulliparity: 66.7%, P < 0.0001; parity: 50.5%, P < 0.01; age at first birth 76.1%, P < 0.001) and were no longer significant in PMD-adjusted models. Lifetime duration of breastfeeding was positively associated with V [>36 vs. 0 ≤1 months ß = 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07; 0.52, Ptrend < 0.01], independent of PMD. CONCLUSIONS: Parity, age at first birth, and breastfeeding were associated with postmenopausal V. IMPACT: This study highlights associations of reproductive factors with mammographic image intensity.

Barriers and proposed solutions to at-home colorectal cancer screening tests in medically underserved health centers across three US regions to inform a randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: At-home colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is an effective way to reduce CRC mortality, but screening rates in medically underserved groups are low. To plan the implementation of a pragmatic randomized trial comparing two population-based outreach approaches, we conducted qualitative research on current processes and barriers to at-home CRC screening in 10 community health centers (CHCs) that serve medically underserved groups, four each in Massachusetts and California, and two tribal facilities in South Dakota. METHODS: We conducted 53 semi-structured interviews with clinical and administrative staff at the participating CHCs. Participants were asked about CRC screening processes, categorized into eight domains: patient identification, outreach, risk assessment, fecal immunochemical test (FIT) workflows, FIT-DNA (i.e., Cologuard) workflows, referral for a follow-up colonoscopy, patient navigation, and educational materials. Transcripts were analyzed using a Rapid Qualitative Analysis approach. A matrix was used to organize and summarize the data into four sub-themes: current process, barriers, facilitators, and solutions to adapt materials for the intervention. RESULTS: Each site's process for stool-based CRC screening varied slightly. Interviewees identified the importance of offering educational materials in English and Spanish, using text messages to remind patients to return kits, adapting materials to address health literacy needs so patients can access instructions in writing, pictures, or video, creating mailed workflows integrated with a tracking system, and offering patient navigation to colonoscopy for patients with an abnormal result. CONCLUSION: Proposed solutions across the three regions will inform a multilevel intervention in a pragmatic trial to increase CRC screening uptake in CHCs.

Addressing Social Risks to Accelerate Health Equity in Cancer Prevention and Control.

Addressing social risks in cancer prevention and control presents a new opportunity for accelerating cancer health equity. As members of the American Society of Preventive Oncology (ASPO) Cancer Health Disparities Special Interest Group, we describe the current state of science on social risks in oncology research and practice. To reduce and eliminate the unjust burden of cancer, we also provide recommendations for multilevel research examining social risks as contributors to inequities and the development of social risks-focused interventions. Suggestions for research and practice are provided within levels of the socio-ecological model, including the interpersonal, organizational, community, and policy levels.

Community collaboration to advance racial/ethnic equity in colorectal Cancer screening: Protocol for a multilevel intervention to improve screening and follow-up in community Health centers.

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization is low among low-income, uninsured, and minority populations that receive care in community health centers (CHCs). There is a need for evidence-based interventions to increase screening and follow-up care in these settings. METHODS: A multilevel, multi-component pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial is being conducted at 8 CHCs in two metropolitan areas (Boston and Los Angeles), with two arms: (1) Mailed FIT outreach with text reminders, and (2) Mailed FIT-DNA with patient support. We also include an additional CHC in Rapid City (South Dakota) that follows a parallel protocol for FIT-DNA but is not randomized due to lack of a comparison group. Eligible individuals in participating clinics are primary care patients ages 45-75, at average-risk for CRC, and overdue for CRC screening. Participants with abnormal screening results are offered navigation for follow-up colonoscopy and CRC risk assessment. RESULTS: The primary outcome is the completion rate of CRC screening at 90 days. Secondary outcomes include the screening completion rate at 180 days and the rate of colonoscopy completion within 6 months among participants with an abnormal result. Additional goals are to enhance our understanding of facilitators and barriers to CRC risk assessment in CHC settings. CONCLUSIONS: This study assesses the effectiveness of two multilevel interventions to increase screening participation and follow-up after abnormal screening in under-resourced clinical settings, informing future efforts to address CRC disparities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05714644.

Bone-Modifying Agents in Early Breast Cancer: Making Sense of Conflicting Data.

The use of adjuvant bone-modifying agents to reduce risk of recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer has not been widely embraced because of conflicting data and small absolute benefits. The clinical practice guideline produced jointly by the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Cancer Care Ontario recommends discussion of risks/benefits with postmenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer about adjuvant bisphosphonates and does not recommend use of adjuvant denosumab to prevent breast cancer recurrence.1.

Imaging Evaluation of the Axilla-A National Survey of Clinical Practice Among Radiologists.

OBJECTIVE: To assess awareness and implementation of the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial findings, approaches to axillary nodal imaging, and to identify differences in practice based on respondent characteristics. METHODS: An online survey was distributed to members of the Society of Breast Imaging. Questions regarded demographics, evaluation approaches, and impact of the Z0011 trial. Poisson regression with robust standard errors to regression was used to generate multivariable-adjusted relative risks and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations. RESULTS: The response rate was 21.7% (430/2007). The majority (295/430, 68.6%) reported always performing axillary US in patients with a BI-RADS 4B, 4C, or 5 breast mass. Most respondents (299/430, 69.5%) were familiar with the findings of the Z0011 trial. Radiologists in academic practice were 0.67 (95% CI: 0.54-0.83) times less likely than private practice radiologists to perform axillary US in all masses and 1.31 (95% CI: 1.13-1.52) times more likely to be very familiar with the trial. Frequency of axillary US showed no association with time spent in breast imaging, years in practice, or presence of dedicated breast surgeons. Increased time in breast imaging and presence of dedicated breast surgeons was strongly associated with familiarity with the trial. No association was observed with years in practice. Most respondents (291/430, 67.7%) made little or no change to their practice based on trial findings. CONCLUSION: There is wide variability in approaches to axillary nodal evaluation, demonstrating a need for improved education and guidelines for axillary imaging in breast cancer patients.