Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium.

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Feasibility of risk assessment for breast cancer molecular subtypes.

PURPOSE: Few breast cancer risk assessment models account for the risk profiles of different tumor subtypes. This study evaluated whether a subtype-specific approach improves discrimination. METHODS: Among 3389 women who had a screening mammogram and were later diagnosed with invasive breast cancer we performed multinomial logistic regression with tumor subtype as the outcome and known breast cancer risk factors as predictors. Tumor subtypes were defined by expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) based on immunohistochemistry. Discrimination was assessed with the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Absolute risk of each subtype was estimated by proportioning Gail absolute risk estimates by the predicted probabilities for each subtype. We then compared risk factor distributions for women in the highest deciles of risk for each subtype. RESULTS: There were 3,073 ER/PR+ HER2 - , 340 ER/PR +HER2 + , 126 ER/PR-ER2+, and 300 triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC). Discrimination differed by subtype; ER/PR-HER2+ (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.59, 0.69) and TNBC (AUC: 0.64, 95% CI 0.61, 0.68) had better discrimination than ER/PR+HER2+ (AUC: 0.61, 95% CI 0.58, 0.64). Compared to other subtypes, patients at high absolute risk of TNBC were younger, mostly Black, had no family history of breast cancer, and higher BMI. Those at high absolute risk of HER2+ cancers were younger and had lower BMI. CONCLUSION: Our study provides proof of concept that stratifying risk prediction for breast cancer subtypes may enable identification of patients with unique profiles conferring increased risk for tumor subtypes.

Breast cancer polygenic risk scores are associated with short-term risk of poor prognosis breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Polygenic risk scores (PRS) for breast cancer may help guide screening decisions. However, few studies have examined whether PRS are associated with risk of short-term or poor prognosis breast cancers. The study purpose was to evaluate the association of the 313 SNP breast cancer PRS with 2-year risk of poor prognosis breast cancer. METHODS: We evaluated the association of breast cancer PRS with breast cancer overall, ER + and ER- breast cancer, and poor prognosis breast cancer diagnosed within 2 years of a negative mammogram among a cohort of 3657 women using logistic regression adjusted for age, breast density, race/ethnicity, year of screening, and genetic ancestry principal components. Breast cancers were considered poor prognosis if they were metastatic, positive lymph nodes, ER/PR + HER2- and > 2 cm, ER/PR/HER2-, or HER2 + and > 1 cm. RESULTS: Of the 308 breast cancers, 137 (44%) were poor prognosis. The overall breast cancer PRS was significantly associated with breast cancer diagnosis within 2 years (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.23-1.57, p < 0.001). The breast cancer PRS was also associated specifically with diagnosis of poor prognosis disease (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03-1.49, p = 0.018), but was more strongly associated with good prognosis cancer (OR 1.52 95% CI 1.29-1.80 p = 3.60 × 10-7) The ER + PRS was significantly associated with ER/PR + breast cancer (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.24-1.61, p < 0.001) and the ER- PRS was significantly associated with ER- breast cancer (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.08-2.02, p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Breast cancer PRS was independently and significantly associated with diagnosis of both breast cancer overall and poor prognosis breast cancer within 2 years of a negative mammogram, suggesting PRS may help guide decisions about screening intervals and supplemental screening.

Proteomic analysis of cardiometabolic biomarkers and predictive modeling of severe outcomes in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The high heterogeneity in the symptoms and severity of COVID-19 makes it challenging to identify high-risk patients early in the disease. Cardiometabolic comorbidities have shown strong associations with COVID-19 severity in epidemiologic studies. Cardiometabolic protein biomarkers, therefore, may provide predictive insight regarding which patients are most susceptible to severe illness from COVID-19. METHODS: In plasma samples collected from 343 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic, we measured 92 circulating protein biomarkers previously implicated in cardiometabolic disease. We performed proteomic analysis and developed predictive models for severe outcomes. We then used these models to predict the outcomes of out-of-sample patients hospitalized with COVID-19 later in the surge (N = 194). RESULTS: We identified a set of seven protein biomarkers predictive of admission to the intensive care unit and/or death (ICU/death) within 28 days of presentation to care. Two of the biomarkers, ADAMTS13 and VEGFD, were associated with a lower risk of ICU/death. The remaining biomarkers, ACE2, IL-1RA, IL6, KIM1, and CTSL1, were associated with higher risk. When used to predict the outcomes of the future, out-of-sample patients, the predictive models built with these protein biomarkers outperformed all models built from standard clinical data, including known COVID-19 risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that proteomic profiling can inform the early clinical impression of a patient's likelihood of developing severe COVID-19 outcomes and, ultimately, accelerate the recognition and treatment of high-risk patients.

Factors Associated with Physician Tolerance of Uncertainty: an Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Physicians need to learn and work amidst a plethora of uncertainties, which may drive burnout. Understanding differences in tolerance of uncertainty is an important research area. OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with tolerance of uncertainty, including well-being metrics such as burnout. DESIGN: Online confidential survey. SETTING: The Massachusetts General Physicians Organization (MGPO). PARTICIPANTS: All 2172 clinically active faculty in the MGPO. MAIN MEASURES: We examined associations for tolerance of uncertainty with demographic information, personal and professional characteristics, and physician well-being metrics. KEY RESULTS: Two thousand twenty (93%) physicians responded. Multivariable analyses identified significant associations of lower tolerance of uncertainty with female gender (OR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.03-1.48); primary care practice (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.22-2.00); years since training (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.995); and lacking a trusted advisor (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.03-1.53). Adjusting for demographic and professional characteristics, physicians with low tolerance of uncertainty had higher likelihood of being burned-out (OR, 3.06; 95% CI, 2.41-3.88), were less likely to be satisfied with career (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.26-0.52), and less likely to be engaged at work (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90). CONCLUSION: At a time when concern about physician well-being is high, with much speculation about causes of burnout, we found a strong relationship between tolerance of uncertainty and physician well-being, across specialties. Particular attention likely needs to be paid to those with less experience, those in specialties with high rates of undifferentiated illness and uncertainty, such as primary care, and ensuring all physicians have access to a trusted advisor. These results generate the potential hypothesis that efforts focused in understanding and embracing uncertainty could be potentially effective for reducing burnout. This concept should be tested in prospective trials.

Attitudes and Actions Related to Racism: the Anti-RaCism (ARC) Survey Study.

BACKGROUND: Racism negatively impacts health and well-being. Members of the medical community must intervene to address racism. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether attitudes about the impact of racism on health or society are associated with intervening around racism. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of a large department of medicine in an urban academic setting. PARTICIPANTS: Interns, residents, fellows, and faculty. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the likelihood of intervening around an observed racist encounter or a racist policy. Predictor variables included age, gender identity, race/ethnicity, and attitudes about racism. KEY RESULTS: Although the majority of the 948 respondents endorsed the impact of racism on health and other societal effects, levels of endorsement were lower among older individuals, or those reporting male gender identity or selecting other race. Higher endorsement of the impact of racism on health was associated with increased odds of speaking up about a racist encounter or racist policy, with odds ratios from 1.18 to 1.30 across scenarios. Likelihood of speaking up about racism did not differ by racial or ethnic group, but older individuals were generally more likely to speak up and individuals between 20 and 29 years of age were more likely to speak with someone other than leadership or the source of a racist encounter. CONCLUSIONS: Awareness of the effects of racism on health is associated with increased likelihood of intervening when a racist encounter is observed or a racist policy is noted. Including information on the impact of racism on health and creating safe spaces to discuss racism may increase the likelihood of bystander intervention in anti-racism strategies.

Risk factors for an advanced breast cancer diagnosis within 2 years of a negative mammogram.

BACKGROUND: Identifying women at risk for advanced interval cancers would allow better targeting of mammography and supplemental screening. The authors assessed risk factors for advanced breast cancer within 2 years of a negative mammogram. METHODS: The authors included 293,520 negative mammograms performed from 2006 to 2015 among 74,736 women. Breast cancers were defined as advanced if they were >2 cm, were >1 cm and triple-negative or human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive, had positive lymph nodes, or were metastatic. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to evaluate associations of age, breast density, menopause, mammogram type, prior breast biopsy, body mass index (BMI), and a family history of breast cancer with a cancer diagnosis within 2 years of a negative mammogram. Models were stratified by year since a negative mammogram. RESULTS: Among 1345 breast cancers, 357 were advanced (26.5%), and 988 (73.5%) were at an early stage. Breast density, prior biopsy, and family history were associated with an increased risk of both advanced and early-stage cancers. Overweight and obese women had a 40% higher risk of early-stage cancer only in year 2 (overweight hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.67; P < .001; obese HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.17-1.70; P < .001). Obese women had a 90% increased risk of advanced cancer in year 1 (HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.14-3.18; P = .014), and both overweight and obese women had a 40% or greater increased risk in year 2 (overweight HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.14-2.07; P = .005; obese HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.00-2.01; P = .051). CONCLUSIONS: A higher BMI was associated with an advanced breast cancer diagnosis within 2 years of a negative mammogram. These results have important implications for risk assessment, screening intervals, and use of supplemental screening.

Continuation of Annual Screening Mammography and Breast Cancer Mortality in Women Older Than 70 Years.

Background: Randomized trials have shown that initiating breast cancer screening between ages 50 and 69 years and continuing it for 10 years decreases breast cancer mortality. However, no trials have studied whether or when women can safely stop screening mammography. An estimated 52% of women aged 75 years or older undergo screening mammography in the United States. Objective: To estimate the effect of breast cancer screening on breast cancer mortality in Medicare beneficiaries aged 70 to 84 years. Design: Large-scale, population-based, observational study of 2 screening strategies: continuing annual mammography, and stopping screening. Setting: U.S. Medicare program, 2000 to 2008. Participants: 1 058 013 beneficiaries aged 70 to 84 years who had a life expectancy of at least 10 years, had no previous breast cancer diagnosis, and underwent screening mammography. Measurements: Eight-year breast cancer mortality, incidence, and treatments, plus the positive predictive value of screening mammography by age group. Results: In women aged 70 to 74 years, the estimated difference in 8-year risk for breast cancer death between continuing and stopping screening was -1.0 (95% CI, -2.3 to 0.1) death per 1000 women (hazard ratio, 0.78 [CI, 0.63 to 0.95]) (a negative risk difference favors continuing). In those aged 75 to 84 years, the corresponding risk difference was 0.07 (CI, -0.93 to 1.3) death per 1000 women (hazard ratio, 1.00 [CI, 0.83 to 1.19]). Limitations: The available Medicare data permit only 8 years of follow-up after screening. As with any study using observational data, the estimates could be affected by residual confounding. Conclusion: Continuing annual breast cancer screening past age 75 years did not result in substantial reductions in 8-year breast cancer mortality compared with stopping screening. Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health.

Calling on Primary Care to Prevent BRCA-Related Cancers.

With the USPSTF reaffirming the importance of screening, counseling, and testing appropriate women for BRCA1/2 mutations, primary care has both an opportunity and a responsibility to lead in the implementation of these recommendations. Since the last UPSTF recommendations about preventing BRCA-related cancers in 2013, progress in incorporating risk assessment, counseling, and testing into primary care has been slow. There are multiple barriers to implementation outside of primary care, including limitations of the electronic medical record, availability of genetic counseling, and the administrative burden associated with obtaining insurance coverage. However, the early imbalance between hype and evidence in genomics led to a general skepticism among primary care providers about the importance of genomic medicine-a sharp contrast with many other areas of internal medicine. As a growing number of companies offer genetic testing directly to consumers and new models of genetic counseling are developed, primary care should capitalize on the opportunity to lead in the prevention of BRCA-related cancers-both to ensure that these services are delivered appropriately and in coordination with ongoing primary care and that primary care is not left behind as genomic medicine becomes a reality across internal medicine.

Different associations of tumor PIK3CA mutations and clinical outcomes according to aspirin use among women with metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The relationships among PIK3CA mutations, medication use and tumor progression remains poorly understood. Aspirin use post-diagnosis may modify components of the PI3K pathway, including AKT and mTOR, and has been associated with lower risk of breast cancer recurrence and mortality. We assessed time to metastasis (TTM) and survival with respect to aspirin use and tumor PIK3CA mutations among women with metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Patients with hormone receptor positive, HER2 negative (HR+/HER2-) metastatic breast cancer treated in 2009-2016 who received tumor genotyping were included. Aspirin use between primary and metastatic diagnosis was extracted from electronic medical records. TTM and survival were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 267 women with metastatic breast cancer, women with PIK3CA mutated tumors had longer TTM than women with PIK3CA wildtype tumors (7.1 vs. 4.7 years, p = 0.008). There was a significant interaction between PIK3CA mutations and aspirin use on TTM (p = 0.006) and survival (p = 0.026). PIK3CA mutations were associated with longer TTM among aspirin non-users (HR = 0.60 95% CI:0.44-0.82 p = 0.001) but not among aspirin users (HR = 1.57 0.86-2.84 p = 0.139). Similarly, PIK3CA mutations were associated with reduced mortality among aspirin non-users (HR = 0.70 95% CI:0.48-1.02 p = 0.066) but not among aspirin users (HR = 1.75 95% CI:0.88-3.49 p = 0.110). CONCLUSIONS: Among women who develop metastatic breast cancer, tumor PIK3CA mutations are associated with slower time to progression and mortality only among aspirin non-users. Larger studies are needed to confirm this finding and examine the relationship among aspirin use, tumor mutation profile, and the overall risk of breast cancer progression.

Communicating Uncertainty: a Narrative Review and Framework for Future Research.

Discussing the uncertainty associated with a clinical decision is thought to be a critical element of shared decision-making. Yet, empirical evidence suggests that clinicians rarely communicate clinical uncertainty to patients, and indeed the culture within healthcare environments is often to equate uncertainty with ignorance or failure. Understanding the rationale for discussion of uncertainty along with the current evidence about approaches to communicating and managing uncertainty can advance shared decision-making as well as highlight gaps in evidence. With an increasing focus on personalized healthcare, and advances in genomics and new disease biomarkers, a more sophisticated understanding of how to communicate the limitations and errors that come from applying population-based, epidemiologic findings to predict individuals' futures is going to be essential. This article provides a narrative review of studies relating to the communication of uncertainty, highlighting current strategies together with challenges and barriers, and outlining a framework for future research.

The Biological and Biographical Basis of Precision Medicine.

Construction of a patient narrative (case history) is a core strategy in the care of patients. Recent advances in biomarker identification and digital sensors to monitor physiological and behavioral features have made constructing a case history more complex. Notably, however, although a biological profile is increasingly a part of the patient's profile, an analogous patient-based biographical (life experience) profile is typically overlooked. Evolving concepts such as allostasis and allostatic load refer to processes promoting stability of physiological systems in the presence of diverse life experiences. Integrating details of both biology and biography is a goal of "precision medicine." In this review, we describe how complex interactions between biology and biography affect disease risk and treatment response and highlight a strategy to develop narratives that establish the integration of biology and biography as the scientific basis for precision medicine.

The Great Opportunity: Cultivating Scientific Inquiry in Medical Residency.

Residency training is a profound experience that greatly influences the career trajectory of every trainee. Currently, residency programs focus heavily (or almost exclusively) on the acquisition of medical knowledge and fail to foster intellectual curiosity and introduce residents to careers in investigation. We share 3 programs embedded in residency training where this focus is shifted with an emphasis on prompting intellectual curiosity and exciting residents about careers in investigation to revitalize the physician-scientist workforce.

Uptake of BRCA 1/2 and oncotype DX testing by medical and surgical oncologists.

PURPOSE: The diffusion of genomic testing is critical to the success of precision medicine, but there is limited information on oncologists' uptake of genetic technology. We aimed to assess the frequency with which medical oncologists and surgeons order BRCA 1/2 and Oncotype DX testing for breast cancer patients. METHODS: We surveyed 732 oncologists and surgeons treating breast cancer patients. Physicians were from Florida, New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and were listed in the 2010 AMA Masterfile or identified by patients. RESULTS: 80.6% of providers ordered BRCA 1/2 testing at least sometimes and 85.4% ordered Oncotype DX (p = 0.01). More frequent ordering of BRCA 1/2 was associated with more positive attitudes toward genetic innovation (OR 1.14, p = 0.001), a belief that testing was likely to be covered by patients' insurance (OR 2.84, p < 0.001), and more frequent ordering of Oncotype DX testing (OR 8.69, p < 0.001). More frequent use of Oncotype DX was associated with a belief that testing was likely to be covered by insurance (OR 7.33, p < 0.001), as well as with more frequent ordering of BRCA 1/2 testing (OR 9.48, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one in five providers never or rarely ever ordered BRCA 1/2 testing for their breast cancer patients, and nearly 15% never or rarely ever ordered Oncotype DX. Less frequent ordering of BRCA 1/2 is associated with less frequent use of Oncotype DX testing, and vice versa. Those who do not order BRCA 1/2 testing report less positive attitudes toward genetic innovation. Further education of this subset of providers regarding the benefits of precision medicine may enable more rapid diffusion of genetic technology.