Inclusion of the US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation for Mammography in State Comprehensive Cancer Control Plans in the US.

Importance: The recommendations for the age and frequency that women at average risk for breast cancer should undergo breast cancer mammography screening have been a matter of emotional, political, and scientific debate over the past decades. Multiple national organizations provide recommendations for breast cancer screening age and frequency. US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) funding for state comprehensive cancer control (CCC) planning requires compliance with stated objectives for attaining goals. US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations on cancer prevention and control are currently used to require coverage of prevention services. Objectives: To evaluate the consistency of state CCC plan objectives compared with the most current (2016) USPSTF recommendations for the age and frequency that individuals should undergo mammography screening and to make recommendations for improvement of state CCC plans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used a descriptive, point-in-time evaluation and was conducted from November 1, 2019, to June 30, 2021. In November 2019, the most recent CCC plans from 50 US states and the District of Columbia were downloaded from the CDC website. The recommended ages at which to begin and end mammography examinations and the frequency of mammography examinations were extracted from plan objectives. Main Outcomes and Measures: The recommendations found in CCC plan objectives regarding the ages at which to begin and end mammography examinations and the frequency of mammography examinations for women with average risk for breast cancer were compared with USPSTF recommendations. Results: Of the 51 CCC plans, 16 (31%) were consistent with all USPSTF recommendations for age and frequency that women at average risk should undergo mammography. Twenty-six plans (51%) were partially consistent with recommendations, and 9 plans (18%) were not consistent with any of the 3 guideline components. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with the USPSTF recommendation, state CCC plans are not homogenous regarding the age and frequency that women at average risk for breast cancer should undergo mammography. This variation is partially due to differences in state-specific planning considerations and discretion, variations in recommendations among national organizations, and publication of plans prior to the most current USPSTF recommendation (2016). Specifying the concept that high-risk populations need different age and frequency of screening recommendations than the general population may reduce heterogeneity among plans.

Progress in Cancer Control in Maryland: 1985-2015.

PURPOSE: Maryland historically had a high cancer burden, which prompted the implementation of aggressive cancer control strategies. We examined the status of cancer in Maryland and work under the current and previous editions of the MD Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan. METHODS: We examined the prevalence of cancer mortality, cancer incidence, and cancer-related behaviors in Maryland and the United States from 1985 to 2015 using publicly available data in the US Cancer Control PLANET, CDC WONDER, and Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System portals. We estimated the average annual cancer deaths avoided by triangulation. RESULTS: In 1983-1987, Maryland had the highest age-adjusted cancer mortality rate of all 50 states, second only to Washington, District of Columbia. Today (2011-2015), Maryland's age-adjusted cancer mortality rate ranks 31st. Overall cancer mortality rates have declined 1.9% annually from 1990 to 2015, avoiding nearly 60 000 deaths over 3 decades. While the prevalence of healthy cancer-related behaviors in Maryland was qualitatively similar or higher than that of the United States in 2015, Maryland's 5-year (2011-2015) cancer incidence rate was significantly greater than that of the United States. CONCLUSIONS: Maryland's 30-year cancer mortality declines have outpaced other states. However, a reduction in mortality while incidence rates remain high indicates a need for enhanced focus on primary prevention.

Selenium and Sex Steroid Hormones in a U.S. Nationally Representative Sample of Men: A Role for the Link between Selenium and Estradiol in Prostate Carcinogenesis?

BACKGROUND: Given the recent findings from pooled studies about a potential inverse association between selenium levels and prostate cancer risk, this cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the association between serum selenium and serum concentrations of sex steroid hormones including estradiol in a nationally representative sample of U.S. men to investigate one mechanism by which selenium may influence prostate cancer risk. METHODS: The study included 1,420 men ages 20 years or older who participated in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 1988 and 1994. We calculated age/race-ethnicity-adjusted and multivariable-adjusted geometric mean serum concentrations of total and estimated free testosterone and estradiol, androstanediol glucuronide, and sex hormone binding globulin, and compared them across quartiles of serum selenium. RESULTS: Adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, smoking status, serum cotinine, household income, physical activity, alcohol consumption, and percent body fat, mean total estradiol [e.g., Q1, 38.00 pg/mL (95% confidence interval (CI), 36.03-40.08) vs. Q4, 35.29 pg/mL (95% CI, 33.53-37.14); P trend = 0.050] and free estradiol [e.g., Q1, 0.96 pg/mL (95% CI, 0.92-1.01) vs. Q4, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85-0.95); P trend = 0.065] concentrations decreased over quartiles of selenium. Stratification by smoking and alcohol consumption, showed that the latter observation was stronger for never smokers (P interaction = 0.073) and those with limited alcohol intake (P interaction = 0.017). No associations were observed for the other sex steroid hormones studied. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggests that a possible mechanism by which selenium may be protective for prostate cancer is related to estrogen. IMPACT: Further studies of longitudinal measurements of serum and toenail selenium in relation to serum measurements of sex steroid hormones are needed.

Barriers to non-small cell lung cancer trial eligibility.

INTRODUCTION: Cancer clinical trial (CCT) enrollment is low potentially threatening the generalizability of trial results and expedited regulatory approvals. We assessed whether type of initial patient appointment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is associated with CCT eligibility. METHODS: Using a patient-to-accrual framework, we conducted a quasi-retrospective cohort pilot study at Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center (SKCCC), Baltimore, Maryland. 153 NSCLC patients new to SKCCC were categorized based on type of initial appointment: patients diagnosed or treated and patients seen for a consultation. CCT eligibility was determined by comparing eligibility criteria for each open trial to the electronic medical record (EMR) of each patient at every office visit occurring within 6-months of initial visit. RESULTS: We found no association between type of initial appointment and CCT eligibility (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.49-2.73). Analyses did suggest current smokers were less likely to be eligible for trials compared to never smokers (OR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64), and stage 4 patients with second line therapy or greater were more likely to be eligible than stage 1 or 2 patients (OR, 5.18; 95% CI, 1.08-24.75). Additional analyses suggested most current smokers and stage 1 or 2 patients had trials available but were still ineligible. CONCLUSIONS: SKCCC has a diverse portfolio of trials available for NSCLC patients and should consider research strategies to re-examine eligibility criteria for future trials to ensure increased enrollment of current smokers and stage 1 or 2 patients. We could not confirm whether type of initial visit was related to eligibility.

Risk factors for metastatic prostate cancer: A sentinel event case series.

BACKGROUND: Root cause analysis is a technique used to assess systems factors related to "sentinel events"-serious adverse events within healthcare systems. This technique is commonly used to identify factors, which allowed these adverse events to occur, to target areas for improvement and to improve health care delivery systems. We sought to apply this technique to men presenting with metastatic prostate cancer (PCa). METHODS: We performed an in-depth case series analysis of 15 patients, who presented with metastatic disease at Johns Hopkins Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center using root cause analysis to refine a list of health system factors that lead to late stage presentation in the current era. RESULTS: Key factors in late diagnosis of PCa included lack of insurance, lack of routine PSA testing, comorbidities, reticence of patients to follow up actionable PSA, and aggressive disease. Three patients had aggressive disease that would not have been discovered at an early stage in the disease process, despite routine screening. However, analysis of the remaining 12 patients illuminated health system factors led to missing important diagnostic information, which might have led to diagnosis of PCa at a curable stage. CONCLUSIONS: The cases help highlight the need for systems based approaches to early diagnosis of PCa. A heterogeneous group of barriers to early diagnosis were identified in our series of patients including economic, health systems, and cultural factors. These findings underscore the need for individualized approaches to preventing delayed diagnosis of PCa. While limited by our single-institution scope, this approach provides a model for research and quality improvement initiatives to identify modifiable systems factors impeding appropriate diagnoses of PCa.

Comparing the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan With Federal Cancer Prevention and Control Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Since the introduction of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2012, 11 million more Americans now have access to preventive services via health care coverage. Several prevention-related recommendations issued by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) are covered under the ACA. State cancer plans often provide prevention strategies, but whether these strategies correspond to federal evidence-based recommendations is unclear. The objective of this article is to assess whether federal evidence-based recommendations, including those covered under the ACA, are included in the Maryland Comprehensive Cancer Control Plan (MCCCP). METHODS: A total of 19 federal recommendations pertaining to cancer prevention and control were identified. Inclusion of federal cancer-related recommendations by USPSTF, CDC, and ACIP in the MCCCP's goals, objectives, and strategies was examined. RESULTS: Nine of the federal recommendations were issued after the MCCCP's publication. MCCCP recommendations corresponded completely with 4 federal recommendations and corresponded only partially with 3. Reasons for partial correspondence included specification of less restrictive at-risk populations or different intervention implementers. Three federal recommendations were not mentioned in the MCCCP's goals, objectives, and strategies. CONCLUSION: Many cancer-related federal recommendations were released after the MCCCP's publication and therefore do not appear in the most current version. We recommend that the results of this analysis be considered in the update of the MCCCP. Our findings underscore the need for a periodic scan for changes to federal recommendations and for adjusting state policies and programs to correspond with federal recommendations, as appropriate for Marylanders.

Survival after community diagnosis of early-stage non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: "Rush to surgery" among patients with worse symptoms, delays related to morbidity, and inclusion of patients with advanced disease in study populations have produced a mixed picture of importance of time to treatment to survival of non-small cell lung cancer. Our objective was to assess the contribution of diagnosis to first surgery interval to survival among patients diagnosed in the community with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Patients with early-stage lung cancer (N = 174) at the Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins who were diagnosed and treated from 2003 to 2009 and followed through 2011 made up a prospective study of overall survival. Diagnosis to first surgery interval was examined overall, as 2 segments (referral interval and treatment interval), as short and longer intervals, and as a continuous variable. RESULTS: The majority of patients were female (55%) and aged more than 65 years (61%). The average mean referral and treatment delays were 61.2 and 5.9 days, respectively. Cox method hazard analysis revealed that older age (years) at diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.05), stage IIB (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.12-4.21), large (>4 cm) (HR, 3.68; 95% CI, 1.05-12.93) or unknown tumor size (HR, 4.45; 95% CI, 1.21-16.38), and weeks from diagnosis to first surgery interval (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.00-1.09) predicted worse overall survival. The threshold period of less than 42 days from diagnosis to surgery did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients seem to benefit from rapid reduction of tumor burden with surgery. Reasons for delay were not available. Nevertheless, referral delay experienced in the community is unduly long. In addition to patient choices, an unconscious patient or physician bias that lung cancer is untreatable or an inevitable consequence of smoking may be operating and needs further investigation.

Geographic proximity and racial disparities in cancer clinical trial participation.

This study assessed the effects of race and place of residence on clinical trial participation by patients seen at a designated NCI comprehensive cancer center. Clinical trial accrual to cancer case ratios were evaluated using a database of residents at the continental United States seen at The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins from 2005 to 2007. Place of residence was categorized into 3 nonoverlapping geographic areas: Baltimore City, non-Baltimore City catchment area, and non-catchment area. Controlling for age, sex, county poverty level, and cancer site, significant race and place of residence differences were seen in therapeutic or nontherapeutic clinical trials participation. White non-Baltimore City catchment area residents, the designated reference group, achieved the highest participation rate. Although the test of interaction (control group compared with all others) was not significant, some race-geographic area group differences were detected. In therapeutic trials, most race-place of residence group levels were statistically lower and different from reference; in nontherapeutic trials, race-specific Baltimore City groups participated at levels similar to reference. Baltimore City residents had lower participation rates only in therapeutic trials, irrespective of race. County poverty level was not significant but was retained as a confounder. Place of residence and race were found to be significant predictors of participation in therapeutic and nontherapeutic clinical trials, although patterns differed somewhat between therapeutic and nontherapeutic trials. Clinical trial accruals are not uniform across age, sex, race, place of residence, cancer site, or trial type, underscoring that cancer centers must better understand their source patients to enhance clinical trial participation.