Benefits and Harms of Mammography Screening in 75 + Women to Inform Shared Decision-making: a Simulation Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend shared decision-making (SDM) around mammography screening for women ≥ 75 years old. OBJECTIVE: To use microsimulation modeling to estimate the lifetime benefits and harms of screening women aged 75, 80, and 85 years based on their individual risk factors (family history, breast density, prior biopsy) and comorbidity level to support SDM in clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We adapted two established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models to evaluate the remaining lifetime benefits and harms of screening U.S. women born in 1940, at decision ages 75, 80, and 85 years considering their individual risk factors and comorbidity levels. Results were summarized for average- and higher-risk women (defined as having breast cancer family history, heterogeneously dense breasts, and no prior biopsy, 5% of the population). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Remaining lifetime breast cancers detected, deaths (breast cancer/other causes), false positives, and overdiagnoses for average- and higher-risk women by age and comorbidity level for screening (one or five screens) vs. no screening per 1000 women. RESULTS: Compared to stopping, one additional screen at 75 years old resulted in six and eight more breast cancers detected (10% overdiagnoses), one and two fewer breast cancer deaths, and 52 and 59 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk women without comorbidities, respectively. Five additional screens over 10 years led to 23 and 31 additional breast cancer cases (29-31% overdiagnoses), four and 15 breast cancer deaths avoided, and 238 and 268 false positives per 1000 average- and higher-risk screened women without comorbidities, respectively. Screening women at older ages (80 and 85 years old) and high comorbidity levels led to fewer breast cancer deaths and a higher percentage of overdiagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation models show that continuing screening in women ≥ 75 years old results in fewer breast cancer deaths but more false positive tests and overdiagnoses. Together, clinicians and 75 + women may use model output to weigh the benefits and harms of continued screening.

Analysis of Breast Cancer Mortality in the US-1975 to 2019.

Importance: Breast cancer mortality in the US declined between 1975 and 2019. The association of changes in metastatic breast cancer treatment with improved breast cancer mortality is unclear. Objective: To simulate the relative associations of breast cancer screening, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer with improved breast cancer mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using aggregated observational and clinical trial data on the dissemination and effects of screening and treatment, 4 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models simulated US breast cancer mortality rates. Death due to breast cancer, overall and by estrogen receptor and ERBB2 (formerly HER2) status, among women aged 30 to 79 years in the US from 1975 to 2019 was simulated. Exposures: Screening mammography, treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Model-estimated age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rate associated with screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment relative to the absence of these exposures was assessed, as was model-estimated median survival after breast cancer metastatic recurrence. Results: The breast cancer mortality rate in the US (age adjusted) was 48/100 000 women in 1975 and 27/100 000 women in 2019. In 2019, the combination of screening, stage I to III treatment, and metastatic treatment was associated with a 58% reduction (model range, 55%-61%) in breast cancer mortality. Of this reduction, 29% (model range, 19%-33%) was associated with treatment of metastatic breast cancer, 47% (model range, 35%-60%) with treatment of stage I to III breast cancer, and 25% (model range, 21%-33%) with mammography screening. Based on simulations, the greatest change in survival after metastatic recurrence occurred between 2000 and 2019, from 1.9 years (model range, 1.0-2.7 years) to 3.2 years (model range, 2.0-4.9 years). Median survival for estrogen receptor (ER)-positive/ERBB2-positive breast cancer improved by 2.5 years (model range, 2.0-3.4 years), whereas median survival for ER-/ERBB2- breast cancer improved by 0.5 years (model range, 0.3-0.8 years). Conclusions and Relevance: According to 4 simulation models, breast cancer screening and treatment in 2019 were associated with a 58% reduction in US breast cancer mortality compared with interventions in 1975. Simulations suggested that treatment for stage I to III breast cancer was associated with approximately 47% of the mortality reduction, whereas treatment for metastatic breast cancer was associated with 29% of the reduction and screening with 25% of the reduction.

Collaborative Modeling to Compare Different Breast Cancer Screening Strategies: A Decision Analysis for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The effects of breast cancer incidence changes and advances in screening and treatment on outcomes of different screening strategies are not well known. Objective: To estimate outcomes of various mammography screening strategies. Design, Setting, and Population: Comparison of outcomes using 6 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) models and national data on breast cancer incidence, mammography performance, treatment effects, and other-cause mortality in US women without previous cancer diagnoses. Exposures: Thirty-six screening strategies with varying start ages (40, 45, 50 years) and stop ages (74, 79 years) with digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) annually, biennially, or a combination of intervals. Strategies were evaluated for all women and for Black women, assuming 100% screening adherence and "real-world" treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: Estimated lifetime benefits (breast cancer deaths averted, percent reduction in breast cancer mortality, life-years gained), harms (false-positive recalls, benign biopsies, overdiagnosis), and number of mammograms per 1000 women. Results: Biennial screening with DBT starting at age 40, 45, or 50 years until age 74 years averted a median of 8.2, 7.5, or 6.7 breast cancer deaths per 1000 women screened, respectively, vs no screening. Biennial DBT screening at age 40 to 74 years (vs no screening) was associated with a 30.0% breast cancer mortality reduction, 1376 false-positive recalls, and 14 overdiagnosed cases per 1000 women screened. Digital mammography screening benefits were similar to those for DBT but had more false-positive recalls. Annual screening increased benefits but resulted in more false-positive recalls and overdiagnosed cases. Benefit-to-harm ratios of continuing screening until age 79 years were similar or superior to stopping at age 74. In all strategies, women with higher-than-average breast cancer risk, higher breast density, and lower comorbidity level experienced greater screening benefits than other groups. Annual screening of Black women from age 40 to 49 years with biennial screening thereafter reduced breast cancer mortality disparities while maintaining similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs as for all women. Conclusions: This modeling analysis suggests that biennial mammography screening starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality and increases life-years gained per mammogram. More intensive screening for women with greater risk of breast cancer diagnosis or death can maintain similar benefit-to-harm trade-offs and reduce mortality disparities.

Association between major discrimination and deficit accumulation in African American cancer survivors: The Detroit Research on Cancer Survivors Study.

BACKGROUND: Discrimination can adversely affect health and accelerate aging, but little is known about these relationships in cancer survivors. This study examines associations of discrimination and aging among self-identified African American survivors. METHODS: A population-based sample of 2232 survivors 20-79 years old at diagnosis were enrolled within 5 years of breast (n = 787), colorectal (n = 227), lung (n = 223), or prostate (n = 995) cancer between 2017 and 2022. Surveys were completed post-active therapy. A deficit accumulation index measured aging-related disease and function (score range, 0-1, where <0.20 is robust, 0.20 to <0.35 is pre-frail, and 0.35+ is frail; 0.06 is a large clinically meaningful difference). The discrimination scale assessed ever experiencing major discrimination and seven types of events (score, 0-7). Linear regression tested the association of discrimination and deficit accumulation, controlling for age, time from diagnosis, cancer type, stage and therapy, and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: Survivors were an average of 62 years old (SD, 9.6), 63.2% reported ever experiencing major discrimination, with an average of 2.4 (SD, 1.7) types of discrimination events. Only 24.4% had deficit accumulation scores considered robust (mean score, 0.30 [SD, 0.13]). Among those who reported ever experiencing major discrimination, survivors with four to seven types of discrimination events (vs. 0-1) had a large, clinically meaningful increase in adjusted deficits (0.062, p < .001) and this pattern was consistent across cancer types. CONCLUSION: African American cancer survivors have high deficit accumulated index scores, and experiences of major discrimination were positively associated with these deficits. Future studies are needed to understand the intersectionality between aging, discrimination, and cancer survivorship among diverse populations.

Breast cancer risk characteristics of women undergoing whole-breast ultrasound screening versus mammography alone.

BACKGROUND: There are no consensus guidelines for supplemental breast cancer screening with whole-breast ultrasound. However, criteria for women at high risk of mammography screening failures (interval invasive cancer or advanced cancer) have been identified. Mammography screening failure risk was evaluated among women undergoing supplemental ultrasound screening in clinical practice compared with women undergoing mammography alone. METHODS: A total of 38,166 screening ultrasounds and 825,360 screening mammograms without supplemental screening were identified during 2014-2020 within three Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) registries. Risk of interval invasive cancer and advanced cancer were determined using BCSC prediction models. High interval invasive breast cancer risk was defined as heterogeneously dense breasts and BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk ≥2.5% or extremely dense breasts and BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk ≥1.67%. Intermediate/high advanced cancer risk was defined as BCSC 6-year advanced breast cancer risk ≥0.38%. RESULTS: A total of 95.3% of 38,166 ultrasounds were among women with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts, compared with 41.8% of 825,360 screening mammograms without supplemental screening (p < .0001). Among women with dense breasts, high interval invasive breast cancer risk was prevalent in 23.7% of screening ultrasounds compared with 18.5% of screening mammograms without supplemental imaging (adjusted odds ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.30-1.39); intermediate/high advanced cancer risk was prevalent in 32.0% of screening ultrasounds versus 30.5% of screening mammograms without supplemental screening (adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.89-0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound screening was highly targeted to women with dense breasts, but only a modest proportion were at high mammography screening failure risk. A clinically significant proportion of women undergoing mammography screening alone were at high mammography screening failure risk.

Epigenetic aging in older breast cancer survivors and noncancer controls: preliminary findings from the Thinking and Living with Cancer Study.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and its treatments may accelerate aging in survivors; however, research has not examined epigenetic markers of aging in longer term breast cancer survivors. This study examined whether older breast cancer survivors showed greater epigenetic aging than noncancer controls and whether epigenetic aging related to functional outcomes. METHODS: Nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors (n = 89) enrolled prior to systemic therapy and frequency-matched controls (n = 101) ages 62 to 84 years provided two blood samples to derive epigenetic aging measures (Horvath, Extrinsic Epigenetic Age [EEA], PhenoAge, GrimAge, Dunedin Pace of Aging) and completed cognitive (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Cognitive Function) and physical (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-12) function assessments at approximately 24 to 36 and 60 months after enrollment. Mixed-effects models tested survivor-control differences in epigenetic aging, adjusting for age and comorbidities; models for functional outcomes also adjusted for racial group, site, and cognitive reserve. RESULTS: Survivors were 1.04 to 2.22 years biologically older than controls on Horvath, EEA, GrimAge, and DunedinPACE measures (p = .001-.04) at approximately 24 to 36 months after enrollment. Survivors exposed to chemotherapy were 1.97 to 2.71 years older (p = .001-.04), and among this group, an older EEA related to worse self-reported cognition (p = .047) relative to controls. An older epigenetic age related to worse physical function in all women (p < .001-.01). Survivors and controls showed similar epigenetic aging over time, but Black survivors showed accelerated aging over time relative to non-Hispanic White survivors. CONCLUSION: Older breast cancer survivors, particularly those exposed to chemotherapy, showed greater epigenetic aging than controls that may relate to worse outcomes. If replicated, measurement of biological aging could complement geriatric assessments to guide cancer care for older women.

Plasma levels of interleukin-6 mediate neurocognitive performance in older breast cancer survivors: The Thinking and Living With Cancer study.

BACKGROUND: Immune activation/inflammation markers (immune markers) were tested to explain differences in neurocognition among older breast cancer survivors versus noncancer controls. METHODS: Women >60 years old with primary breast cancer (stages 0-III) (n = 400) were assessed before systemic therapy with frequency-matched controls (n = 329) and followed annually to 60 months; blood was collected during annual assessments from 2016 to 2020. Neurocognition was measured by tests of attention, processing speed, and executive function (APE). Plasma levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8, IL-10, tumor necrosis factor α (TNF-α), and interferon γ were determined using multiplex testing. Mixed linear models were used to compare results of immune marker levels by survivor/control group by time and by controlling for age, racial/ethnic group, cognitive reserve, and study site. Covariate-adjusted multilevel mediation analyses tested whether survivor/control group effects on cognition were explained by immune markers; secondary analyses examined the impact of additional covariates (e.g., comorbidity and obesity) on mediation effects. RESULTS: Participants were aged 60-90 years (mean, 67.7 years). Most survivors had stage I (60.9%) estrogen receptor-positive tumors (87.6%). Survivors had significantly higher IL-6 levels than controls before systemic therapy and at 12, 24, and 60 months (p ≤ .001-.014) but there were no differences for other markers. Survivors had lower adjusted APE scores than controls (p < .05). Levels of IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-α were related to APE, with IL-6 explaining part of the relationship between survivor/control group and APE (p = .01). The magnitude of this mediation effect decreased but remained significant (p = .047) after the consideration of additional covariates. CONCLUSIONS: Older breast cancer survivors had worse long-term neurocognitive performance than controls, and this relationship was explained in part by elevated IL-6.

Using Protection Motivation Theory to Predict Intentions for Breast Cancer Risk Management: Intervention Mechanisms from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of a web-based, Protection Motivation Theory (PMT)-informed breast cancer education and decision support tool on intentions for risk-reducing medication and breast MRI among high-risk women. Women with ≥ 1.67% 5-year breast cancer risk (N = 995) were randomized to (1) control or (2) the PMT-informed intervention. Six weeks post-intervention, 924 (93% retention) self-reported PMT constructs and behavioral intentions. Bootstrapped mediations evaluated the direct effect of the intervention on behavioral intentions and the mediating role of PMT constructs. There was no direct intervention effect on intentions for risk-reducing medication or MRI (p's ≥ 0.12). There were significant indirect effects on risk-reducing medication intentions via perceived risk, self-efficacy, and response efficacy, and on MRI intentions via perceived risk and response efficacy (p's ≤ 0.04). The PMT-informed intervention effected behavioral intentions via perceived breast cancer risk, self-efficacy, and response efficacy. Future research should extend these findings from intentions to behavior. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03029286 (date of registration: January 24, 2017).

Multimodal MRI examination of structural and functional brain changes in older women with breast cancer in the first year of antiestrogen hormonal therapy.

PURPOSE: Cancer patients are concerned about treatment-related cognitive problems. We examined effects of antiestrogen hormonal therapy on brain imaging metrics in older women with breast cancer. METHODS: Women aged 60 + treated with hormonal therapy only and matched non-cancer controls (n = 29/group) completed MRI and objective and self-reported cognitive assessment at pre-treatment/enrollment and 12 months later. Gray matter was examined using voxel-based morphometry (VBM), FreeSurfer, and brain age calculations. Functional MRI (fMRI) assessed working memory-related activation. Analyses examined cross-sectional and longitudinal differences and tested associations between brain metrics, cognition, and days on hormonal therapy. RESULTS: The cancer group showed regional reductions over 12 months in frontal, temporal, and parietal gray matter on VBM, reduced FreeSurfer cortical thickness in prefrontal, parietal, and insular regions, and increased working memory-related fMRI activation in frontal, cingulate, and visual association cortex. Controls showed only reductions in fusiform gyrus on VBM and FreeSurfer temporal and parietal cortex thickness. Women with breast cancer showed higher estimated brain age and lower regional gray matter volume than controls at both time points. The cancer group showed a trend toward lower performance in attention, processing speed, and executive function at follow-up. There were no significant associations between brain imaging metrics and cognition or days on hormonal therapy. CONCLUSION: Older women with breast cancer showed brain changes in the first year of hormonal therapy. Increased brain activation during working memory processing may be a sign of functional compensation for treatment-related structural changes. This hypothesis should be tested in larger samples over longer time periods. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03451383.

Association of markers of tumor aggressivity and cognition in women with breast cancer before adjuvant treatment: The Thinking and Living with Cancer Study.

PURPOSE: Tumor features associated with aggressive cancers may affect cognition prior to systemic therapy. We evaluated associations of cognition prior to adjuvant therapy and tumor aggressivity in older breast cancer patients. METHODS: Women diagnosed with non-metastatic breast cancer (n = 705) ages 60-98 were enrolled from August 2010-March 2020. Cognition was measured post-surgery, pre-systemic therapy using self-reported (FACT-Cog Perceived Cognitive Impairment [PCI]) and objective tests of attention, processing speed, and executive function (APE domain) and learning and memory [LM domain]. Linear regression tested associations of pre-treatment tumor features and cognition, adjusting for age, race, and study site. HER2 positivity and higher stage (II/III vs. 0/I) were a priori predictors of cognition; in secondary analyses we explored associations of other tumor features and cognitive impairment (i.e., PCI score < 54 or having 2 tests < 1.5 SD or 1 test < 2 SD from the mean APE or LM domain score). RESULTS: HER2 positivity and the hormone receptor negative/HER2 + molecular subtype were associated with lower adjusted mean self-reported cognition scores and higher impairment rates (p values < .05). Higher stage of disease was associated with lower objective performance in APE. Other tumor features were associated with cognition in unadjusted and adjusted models, including larger tumor size and lower PCI scores (p = 0.02). Tumor features were not related to LM. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-adjuvant therapy cognition was associated with HER2 positivity and higher stage of disease and other features of aggressive tumors. Additional research is needed to confirm these results and assess potential mechanisms and clinical management strategies.

Reflecting on 20 years of breast cancer modeling in CISNET: Recommendations for future cancer systems modeling efforts.

Since 2000, the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) modeling teams have developed and applied microsimulation and statistical models of breast cancer. Here, we illustrate the use of collaborative breast cancer multilevel systems modeling in CISNET to demonstrate the flexibility of systems modeling to address important clinical and policy-relevant questions. Challenges and opportunities of future systems modeling are also summarized. The 6 CISNET breast cancer models embody the key features of systems modeling by incorporating numerous data sources and reflecting tumor, person, and health system factors that change over time and interact to affect the burden of breast cancer. Multidisciplinary modeling teams have explored alternative representations of breast cancer to reveal insights into breast cancer natural history, including the role of overdiagnosis and race differences in tumor characteristics. The models have been used to compare strategies for improving the balance of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening based on personal risk factors, including age, breast density, polygenic risk, and history of Down syndrome or a history of childhood cancer. The models have also provided evidence to support the delivery of care by simulating outcomes following clinical decisions about breast cancer treatment and estimating the relative impact of screening and treatment on the United States population. The insights provided by the CISNET breast cancer multilevel modeling efforts have informed policy and clinical guidelines. The 20 years of CISNET modeling experience has highlighted opportunities and challenges to expanding the impact of systems modeling. Moving forward, CISNET research will continue to use systems modeling to address cancer control issues, including modeling structural inequities affecting racial disparities in the burden of breast cancer. Future work will also leverage the lessons from team science, expand resource sharing, and foster the careers of early stage modeling scientists to ensure the sustainability of these efforts.

Identifying Equitable Screening Mammography Strategies for Black Women in the United States Using Simulation Modeling.

BACKGROUND: Screening mammography guidelines do not explicitly consider racial differences in breast cancer epidemiology, treatment, and survival. OBJECTIVE: To compare tradeoffs of screening strategies in Black women versus White women under current guidelines. DESIGN: An established model from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network simulated screening outcomes using race-specific inputs for subtype distribution; breast density; mammography performance; age-, stage-, and subtype-specific treatment effects; and non-breast cancer mortality. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: A 1980 U.S. birth cohort of Black and White women. INTERVENTION: Screening strategies until age 74 years with varying initiation ages and intervals. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes included benefits (life-years gained [LYG], breast cancer deaths averted, and mortality reduction), harms (mammographies, false positives, and overdiagnoses), and benefit-harm ratios (tradeoffs) by race. Efficiency (benefits per unit resource), mortality disparity reduction, and equity in tradeoffs were evaluated. Equitable strategies for Black women were defined as those with tradeoffs closest to benchmark values for screening White women biennially from ages 50 to 74 years. RESULTS: Biennial screening from ages 45 to 74 years was most efficient for Black women, whereas biennial screening from ages 40 to 74 years was most equitable. Initiating screening 10 years earlier in Black versus White women reduced Black-White mortality disparities by 57% with similar LYG per mammogram for both populations. Selection of the most equitable strategy was sensitive to assumptions about disparities in real-world treatment effectiveness: The less effective treatment was for Black women, the more intensively Black women could be screened before tradeoffs fell short of those experienced by White women. LIMITATION: Single model. CONCLUSION: Initiating biennial screening in Black women at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality disparities and yields benefit-harm ratios that are similar to tradeoffs of White women screened biennially from ages 50 to 74 years. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health.

Loneliness and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in older breast cancer survivors and noncancer controls.

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had wide-ranging health effects and increased isolation. Older with cancer patients might be especially vulnerable to loneliness and poor mental health during the pandemic. METHODS: The authors included active participants enrolled in the longitudinal Thinking and Living With Cancer study of nonmetastatic breast cancer survivors aged 60 to 89 years (n = 262) and matched controls (n = 165) from 5 US regions. Participants completed questionnaires at parent study enrollment and then annually, including a web-based or telephone COVID-19 survey, between May 27 and September 11, 2020. Mixed-effects models were used to examine changes in loneliness (a single item on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression [CES-D] scale) from before to during the pandemic in survivors versus controls and to test survivor-control differences in the associations between changes in loneliness and changes in mental health, including depression (CES-D, excluding the loneliness item), anxiety (the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and perceived stress (the Perceived Stress Scale). Models were adjusted for age, race, county COVID-19 death rates, and time between assessments. RESULTS: Loneliness increased from before to during the pandemic (0.211; P = .001), with no survivor-control differences. Increased loneliness was associated with worsening depression (3.958; P < .001) and anxiety (3.242; P < .001) symptoms and higher stress (1.172; P < .001) during the pandemic, also with no survivor-control differences. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors reported changes in loneliness and mental health similar to those reported by women without cancer. However, both groups reported increased loneliness from before to during the pandemic that was related to worsening mental health, suggesting that screening for loneliness during medical care interactions will be important for identifying all older women at risk for adverse mental health effects of the pandemic.

Clinical Benefits, Harms, and Cost-Effectiveness of Breast Cancer Screening for Survivors of Childhood Cancer Treated With Chest Radiation : A Comparative Modeling Study.

BACKGROUND: Surveillance with annual mammography and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended for female survivors of childhood cancer treated with chest radiation, yet benefits, harms, and costs are uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the benefits, harms, and cost-effectiveness of breast cancer screening strategies in childhood cancer survivors. DESIGN: Collaborative simulation modeling using 2 Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network breast cancer models. DATA SOURCES: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study and published data. TARGET POPULATION: Women aged 20 years with a history of chest radiotherapy. TIME HORIZON: Lifetime. PERSPECTIVE: Payer. INTERVENTION: Annual MRI with or without mammography, starting at age 25, 30, or 35 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Breast cancer deaths averted, false-positive screening results, benign biopsy results, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Lifetime breast cancer mortality risk without screening was 10% to 11% across models. Compared with no screening, starting at age 25 years, annual mammography with MRI averted the most deaths (56% to 71%) and annual MRI (without mammography) averted 56% to 62%. Both strategies had the most screening tests, false-positive screening results, and benign biopsy results. For an ICER threshold of less than $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, screening beginning at age 30 years was preferred. RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS: Assuming lower screening performance, the benefit of adding mammography to MRI increased in both models, although the conclusions about preferred starting age remained unchanged. LIMITATION: Elevated breast cancer risk was based on survivors diagnosed with childhood cancer between 1970 and 1986. CONCLUSION: Early initiation (at ages 25 to 30 years) of annual breast cancer screening with MRI, with or without mammography, might reduce breast cancer mortality by half or more in survivors of childhood cancer. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: American Cancer Society and National Institutes of Health.

Symptom burden among older breast cancer survivors: The Thinking and Living With Cancer (TLC) study.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about longitudinal symptom burden, its consequences for well-being, and whether lifestyle moderates the burden in older survivors. METHODS: The authors report on 36-month data from survivors aged ≥60 years with newly diagnosed, nonmetastatic breast cancer and noncancer controls recruited from August 2010 through June 2016. Symptom burden was measured as the sum of self-reported symptoms/diseases as follows: pain (yes or no), fatigue (on the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy [FACT]-Fatigue scale), cognitive (on the FACT-Cognitive scale), sleep problems (yes or no), depression (on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale), anxiety (on the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory), and cardiac problems and neuropathy (yes or no). Well-being was measured using the FACT-General scale, with scores from 0 to 100. Lifestyle included smoking, alcohol use, body mass index, physical activity, and leisure activities. Mixed models assessed relations between treatment group (chemotherapy with or without hormone therapy, hormone therapy only, and controls) and symptom burden, lifestyle, and covariates. Separate models tested the effects of fluctuations in symptom burden and lifestyle on function. RESULTS: All groups reported high baseline symptoms, and levels remained high over time; differences between survivors and controls were most notable for cognitive and sleep problems, anxiety, and neuropathy. The adjusted burden score was highest among chemotherapy-exposed survivors, followed by hormone therapy-exposed survivors versus controls (P < .001). The burden score was related to physical, emotional, and functional well-being (eg, survivors with lower vs higher burden scores had 12.4-point higher physical well-being scores). The composite lifestyle score was not related to symptom burden or well-being, but physical activity was significantly associated with each outcome (P < .005). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer and its treatments are associated with a higher level of actionable symptoms and greater loss of well-being over time in older breast cancer survivors than in comparable noncancer populations, suggesting the need for surveillance and opportunities for intervention.

Sleep disturbance and neurocognitive outcomes in older patients with breast cancer: Interaction with genotype.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance and genetic profile are risks for cognitive decline in noncancer populations, yet their role in cancer-related cognitive problems remains understudied. This study examined whether sleep disturbance was associated with worse neurocognitive outcomes in breast cancer survivors and whether sleep effects on cognition varied by genotype. METHODS: Newly diagnosed female patients (n = 319) who were 60 years old or older and had stage 0 to III breast cancer were recruited from August 2010 to December 2015. Assessments were performed before systemic therapy and 12 and 24 months later. Neuropsychological testing measured attention, processing speed, executive function, learning, and memory; self-perceived cognitive functioning was also assessed. Sleep disturbance was defined by self-report of routine poor or restless sleep. Genotyping included APOE, BDNF, and COMT polymorphisms. Random effects fluctuation models tested associations of between-person and within-person differences in sleep, genotype, and sleep-genotype interactions and cognition and controlled for age, reading level, race, site, and treatment. RESULTS: One-third of the patients reported sleep disturbances at each time point. There was a sleep-APOE ε4 interaction (P = .001) in which patients with the APOE ε4 allele and sleep disturbances had significantly lower learning and memory scores than those who were APOE ε4-negative and without sleep disturbances. There was also a sleep disturbance-COMT genotype interaction (P = .02) in which COMT Val carriers with sleep disturbances had lower perceived cognition than noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep disturbance was common and was associated with worse cognitive performance in older breast cancer survivors, especially those with a genetic risk for cognitive decline. Survivorship care should include sleep assessments and interventions to address sleep problems.

The impact of gene expression profile testing on confidence in chemotherapy decisions and prognostic expectations.

PURPOSE: Little is known about whether gene expression profile (GEP) testing and specific recurrence scores (e.g., medium risk) improve women's confidence in their chemotherapy decision or perceived recurrence risk. We evaluate the relationship between these outcomes and GEP testing. METHODS: We surveyed women eligible for GEP testing (stage I or II, Gr1-2, ER+, HER2-) identified through the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry of Washington or Kaiser Permanente Northern California from 2012 to 2016, approximately 0-4 years from diagnosis (N = 904, RR = 45.4%). Confidence in chemotherapy was measured as confident (Very, completely) versus Not Confident (Somewhat, A little, Not At All); perceived risk recurrence was recorded numerically (0-100%). Women reported their GEP test receipt (Yes, No, Unknown) and risk recurrence score (High, Intermediate, Low, Unknown). In our analytic sample (N = 833), we propensity score weighted the three test receipt cohorts and used propensity weighted multivariable regressions to examine associations between the outcomes and the three test receipt cohorts, with receipt stratified by score. RESULTS: 29.5% reported an unknown GEP test receipt; 86% being confident. Compared to no test receipt, an intermediate score (aOR 0.34; 95% CI 0.20-0.58), unknown score (aOR 0.09; 95% CI 0.05-0.18), and unknown test receipt (aOR 0.37; 95% CI 0.24-0.57) were less likely to report confidence. Most women greatly overestimated their recurrence risk regardless of their test receipt or score. CONCLUSIONS: GEP testing was not associated with greater confidence in chemotherapy decisions. Better communication about GEP testing and the implications for recurrence risk may improve women's decisional confidence.

Association of Screening and Treatment With Breast Cancer Mortality by Molecular Subtype in US Women, 2000-2012.

Importance: Given recent advances in screening mammography and adjuvant therapy (treatment), quantifying their separate and combined effects on US breast cancer mortality reductions by molecular subtype could guide future decisions to reduce disease burden. Objective: To evaluate the contributions associated with screening and treatment to breast cancer mortality reductions by molecular subtype based on estrogen-receptor (ER) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (ERBB2, formerly HER2 or HER2/neu). Design, Setting, and Participants: Six Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Network (CISNET) models simulated US breast cancer mortality from 2000 to 2012 using national data on plain-film and digital mammography patterns and performance, dissemination and efficacy of ER/ERBB2-specific treatment, and competing mortality. Multiple US birth cohorts were simulated. Exposures: Screening mammography and treatment. Main Outcomes and Measures: The models compared age-adjusted, overall, and ER/ERBB2-specific breast cancer mortality rates from 2000 to 2012 for women aged 30 to 79 years relative to the estimated mortality rate in the absence of screening and treatment (baseline rate); mortality reductions were apportioned to screening and treatment. Results: In 2000, the estimated reduction in overall breast cancer mortality rate was 37% (model range, 27%-42%) relative to the estimated baseline rate in 2000 of 64 deaths (model range, 56-73) per 100 000 women: 44% (model range, 35%-60%) of this reduction was associated with screening and 56% (model range, 40%-65%) with treatment. In 2012, the estimated reduction in overall breast cancer mortality rate was 49% (model range, 39%-58%) relative to the estimated baseline rate in 2012 of 63 deaths (model range, 54-73) per 100 000 women: 37% (model range, 26%-51%) of this reduction was associated with screening and 63% (model range, 49%-74%) with treatment. Of the 63% associated with treatment, 31% (model range, 22%-37%) was associated with chemotherapy, 27% (model range, 18%-36%) with hormone therapy, and 4% (model range, 1%-6%) with trastuzumab. The estimated relative contributions associated with screening vs treatment varied by molecular subtype: for ER+/ERBB2-, 36% (model range, 24%-50%) vs 64% (model range, 50%-76%); for ER+/ERBB2+, 31% (model range, 23%-41%) vs 69% (model range, 59%-77%); for ER-/ERBB2+, 40% (model range, 34%-47%) vs 60% (model range, 53%-66%); and for ER-/ERBB2-, 48% (model range, 38%-57%) vs 52% (model range, 44%-62%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this simulation modeling study that projected trends in breast cancer mortality rates among US women, decreases in overall breast cancer mortality from 2000 to 2012 were associated with advances in screening and in adjuvant therapy, although the associations varied by breast cancer molecular subtype.

Oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation in breast cancer multigene testing.

PURPOSE: Multigene testing for breast cancer recurrence risk became available in 2007, yet many eligible patients remain untested. This study evaluated variation in testing rates, and oncologist and organizational factors associated with variation, in a setting without financial influences on testing. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using electronic data and oncologist surveys within Kaiser Permanente Northern California, a large integrated health care system. Analyses included all 2974 test eligible patients from 2013 to 2015, 113 oncologists, and 15 practice groups. Receipt of multigene testing was evaluated with generalized linear mixed models. RESULTS: Overall, 39% of eligible patients had multigene testing, but rates varied widely among practice groups, ranging from 24 to 48% after case mix adjustment. This 24% difference among practices was greater than the variation associated with most patient characteristics, including comorbidities and race/ethnicity, and similar to that associated with tumor size. Practice group and oncologist factors were statistically significant contributors to the variation in testing after adjusting for patient factors. Patients were more likely to be tested if they had a female oncologist (aOR 1.60, 95% CI 1.21-2.12) or were in a practice whose chief had a high testing rate (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.12-1.29 per 10% increase in the percent tested). CONCLUSIONS: Oncologist and leadership practices play a key role in the variation in genomic test use for cancer recurrence risk even in a healthcare system without financial barriers to testing and could be a leverage point for implementing desired practice changes for new genomic advances.