Vital Signs: Mammography Use and Association with Social Determinants of Health and Health-Related Social Needs Among Women - United States, 2022.

Introduction: Approximately 40,000 U.S. women die from breast cancer each year. Mammography is recommended to screen for breast cancer and reduce breast cancer mortality. Adverse social determinants of heath (SDOH) and health-related social needs (HRSNs) (e.g., lack of transportation and social isolation) can be barriers to getting mammograms. Methods: Data from the 2022 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System were analyzed to estimate the prevalence of mammography use within the previous 2 years among women aged 40-74 years by jurisdiction, age group, and sociodemographic factors. The association between mammography use and measures of SDOH and HRSNs was assessed for jurisdictions that administered the Social Determinants and Health Equity module. Results: Among women aged 50-74 years, state-level mammography use ranged from 64.0% to 85.5%. Having health insurance and a personal health care provider were associated with having had a mammogram within the previous 2 years. Among women aged 50-74 years, mammography prevalence was 83.2% for those with no adverse SDOH and HRSNs and 65.7% for those with three or more adverse SDOH and HRSNs. Life dissatisfaction, feeling socially isolated, experiencing lost or reduced hours of employment, receiving food stamps, lacking reliable transportation, and reporting cost as a barrier for access to care were all strongly associated with not having had a mammogram within the previous 2 years. Conclusions and Implications for Public Health Practice: Identifying specific adverse SDOH and HRSNs that women experience and coordinating activities among health care providers, social services, community organizations, and public health programs to provide services that help address these needs might increase mammography use and ultimately decrease breast cancer deaths.

Trends in Nicotine Strength in Electronic Cigarettes Sold in the United States by Flavor, Product Type, and Manufacturer, 2017-2022.

INTRODUCTION: Most e-cigarettes contain highly addictive nicotine. This study assessed trends in nicotine strength in e-cigarettes sold in the United States during January 2017-March 2022. AIMS AND METHODS: We obtained January 2017-March 2022 national retail e-cigarette sales data from NielsenIQ. We assessed monthly average nicotine strength overall, by e-cigarette product and flavor type, and manufacturer. A Joinpoint regression model assessed the magnitude and significance of changes in nicotine strength. RESULTS: During January 2017-March 2022, monthly average nicotine strength of e-cigarette products increased from 2.5% to 4.4%, an average of 0.8% per month (p < .001). Monthly average nicotine strength of disposable e-cigarettes increased the most (average monthly percentage change [AMPC] = 1.26%, p < .001) as compared to prefilled pods (AMPC = 0.6%, p < .001) and e-liquids (AMPC = 0.5%, p = .218). Monthly average nicotine strength for all flavors of e-cigarette products increased except for mint-flavored products. Increases were greatest for beverage-flavored products (AMPC = 2.1%, p < .001), followed by menthol-flavored products (AMPC = 1.2%, p < .001). Among the top 10 e-cigarette manufacturers assessed, monthly average nicotine strength decreased for Juul Labs products from 5% to 4.7% (AMPC = -0.1%, p < .001) but increased significantly for five manufacturers' products and remained unchanged at 5%-6% for four manufacturers' products. CONCLUSIONS: Monthly average nicotine strength of e-cigarette products increased overall, for most product and flavor types, and for some manufacturers in the United States during the study period. Imposing maximum limits on nicotine strength of e-cigarettes together with other evidence-based tobacco control strategies can help reduce the use of e-cigarettes among youth and increase tobacco product cessation among adults. IMPLICATIONS: From January 2017 to March 2022, the monthly average nicotine strength of disposable e-cigarettes increased substantially and exceeded prefilled pods since May 2020. E-cigarettes with menthol flavor and youth-appealing flavors, like fruit, also had sharp increases in monthly average nicotine strength. Among the top 10 e-cigarette manufacturers, monthly average nicotine strength increased or remained unchanged at a high nicotine level for all manufacturers' products, except Juul Lab's products. Comprehensive strategies including restricting sales of all flavored e-cigarettes, restricting youth tobacco product access, and imposing maximum limits on nicotine strength may help reduce youth e-cigarette use and increase tobacco cessation.

Use of a multi-method approach to rapidly assess the impact of public health policies at the state and local level: a case study of flavored e-cigarette policies.

BACKGROUND: E-cigarettes are the most-commonly used tobacco product by youth since 2014. To prevent youth access and use of e-cigarettes, many U.S. states and localities have enacted policies over a relatively short period of time. The adoption of these policies has necessitated timely data collection to evaluate impacts. METHODS: To assess the impact of flavored e-cigarette policies in select states and local jurisdictions across the United States, a multi-method, complementary approach was implemented from July 2019 to present, which includes analyses of cross-sectional online surveys of young people ages 13-24 years with retail sales data. RESULTS: From February 2020 through February 2023, cross-sectional surveys have been conducted in three cities, one county, and eight states where policy changes have been enacted or are likely to be enacted. Data collection occurred every six months to provide near real-time data and examine trends over time. Additionally, weekly retail sales data were aggregated to showcase monthly sales trends at the national level and for the selected states. DISCUSSION: This rapid and efficient method of coupling online survey data with retail sales data provides a timely and effective approach for monitoring a quickly changing tobacco product landscape, particularly for states and localities where rapidly-available data is often not available. This approach can also be used to monitor other health behaviors and relevant policy impacts.

Changes in Sales of E-Cigarettes, Cigarettes, and Nicotine Replacement Therapy Products Before, During, and After the EVALI Outbreak.

INTRODUCTION: In 2019, an outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) occurred in the US. We used Nielsen retail sales data to assess trends in sales of e-cigarettes, cigarettes, and nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products before, during, and after the EVALI outbreak. METHODS: Monthly unit sales of e-cigarettes, cigarettes, and NRT products overall and by product type were assessed during January 2019 through June 2020 by using an interrupted time series model. Two time points were specified at the period ending July 13, 2019, and the period ending February 22, 2020, to partition before, during, and after the outbreak period. Sales trends by aggregated state-level EVALI case prevalence (low, medium, and high) were assessed to investigate interstate variations in changes of sales coinciding with the EVALI outbreak. RESULTS: Monthly e-cigarette sales increased 3.5% (P < .001) before the outbreak and decreased 3.1% (P < .001) during the outbreak, with no significant changes after the outbreak. Monthly cigarette sales increased 1.6% (P < .001) before the outbreak, decreased 1.8% (P < .001) during the outbreak, and increased 2.7% (P < .001) after the outbreak. NRT sales did not change significantly before or during the outbreak but decreased (2.8%, P = .01) after the outbreak. Sales trends by state-level EVALI case prevalence were similar to national-level sales trends. CONCLUSION: Cigarette and e-cigarette sales decreased during the EVALI outbreak, but no changes in overall NRT sales were observed until after the outbreak. Continued monitoring of tobacco sales data can provide insight into potential changes in use patterns and inform tobacco prevention and control efforts.

U.S. healthcare spending attributable to cigarette smoking in 2014.

INTRODUCTION: Cigarette smoking continues to be the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the U.S. Smoking also carries an economic burden, including smoking-attributable healthcare spending. This study assessed smoking-attributable fractions in healthcare spending between 2010 and 2014, overall and by insurance type (Medicaid, Medicare, private, out-of-pocket, other federal, other) and by medical service (inpatient, non-inpatient, prescriptions). METHODS: Data were obtained from the 2010-2014 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey linked to the 2008-2013 National Health Interview Survey. The final sample (n = 49,540) was restricted to non-pregnant adults aged 18 years or older. Estimates from two-part models (multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear models) and data from 2014 national health expenditures were combined to estimate the share of and total (in 2014 dollars) annual healthcare spending attributable to cigarette smoking among U.S. adults. All models controlled for socio-demographic characteristics, health-related behaviors, and attitudes. RESULTS: During 2010-2014, an estimated 11.7% (95% CI = 11.6%, 11.8%) of U.S. annual healthcare spending could be attributed to adult cigarette smoking, translating to annual healthcare spending of more than $225 billion dollars based on total personal healthcare expenditures reported in 2014. More than 50% of this smoking-attributable spending was funded by Medicare or Medicaid. For Medicaid, the estimated healthcare spending attributable fraction increased more than 30% between 2010 and 2014. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette smoking exacts a substantial economic burden in the U.S. Continuing efforts to implement proven population-based interventions have been shown to reduce the health and economic burden of cigarette smoking nationally.

E-cigarette Unit Sales, by Product and Flavor Type - United States, 2014-2020.

Since electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) entered the U.S. marketplace in 2007, the landscape has evolved to include different product types (e.g., prefilled cartridge-based and disposable products) and flavored e-liquids (e.g., fruit, candy, mint, menthol, and tobacco flavors), which have contributed to increases in youth use (1,2). E-cigarettes have been the most commonly used tobacco product among U.S. youths since 2014; in 2019, 27.5% of high school students reported current e-cigarette use (3). To assess trends in unit sales of e-cigarettes in the United States by product and flavor type, CDC, CDC Foundation, and Truth Initiative analyzed retail scanner data during September 14, 2014-May 17, 2020, from Information Resources, Inc. (IRI). During this period, total e-cigarette sales increased by 122.2%, from 7.7 million to 17.1 million units per 4-week interval. By product type, the proportion of total sales that was prefilled cartridge products increased during September 2014-August 2019 (47.5% to 89.4%). During August 2019-May 2020, the proportion of total sales that was disposable products increased from 10.3% to 19.8%, while the proportion that was prefilled cartridge products decreased (89.4% to 80.2%). Among prefilled cartridge sales, the proportion of mint sales increased during September 2014-August 2019 (<0.1% to 47.6%); during August 2019-May 2020, mint sales decreased (47.6% to 0.3%), as menthol sales increased (10.7% to 61.8%). Among disposable e-cigarette sales during September 2014-May 2020, the proportion of mint sales increased (<0.1% to 10.5%), although tobacco-flavored (52.2% to 17.2%) and menthol-flavored (30.3% to 10.2%) sales decreased; during the same period, sales of all other flavors combined increased (17.2% to 62.1%). E-cigarette sales increased during 2014-2020, but fluctuations occurred overall and by product and flavor type, which could be attributed to consumer preferences and accessibility. Continued monitoring of e-cigarette sales and use is critical to inform strategies at the national, state, and community levels to minimize the risks of e-cigarettes on individual- and population-level health. As part of a comprehensive approach to prevent and reduce youth e-cigarettes use, such strategies could include those that address youth-appealing product innovations and flavors.

Patterns of tobacco use and nicotine dependence among youth, United States, 2017-2018.

This study examined patterns of tobacco product use and their association with nicotine dependence among U.S. youth. Combined data from the 2017-2018 National Youth Tobacco Surveys were analyzed for students that reported current (past-30-day) use of e-cigarettes, cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, or hookah (n = 6106). Analyses assessed multiple product use (≥2 tobacco products) overall and by sex, school level, race/ethnicity, current use, and frequent use (use of a product for ≥20 of the preceding 30 days). Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify correlates of nicotine dependence. During 2017-2018, 40.8% of tobacco product users reported use of multiple products. Multiple product use ranged from 47.0% among e-cigarette users to 80.7% among cigarette smokers. Among frequent users of each respective product, 80.0% of cigarette smokers, 74.9% of cigar smokers, 73.6% of smokeless tobacco users, 70.7% of hookah smokers, and 40.3% of e-cigarette users reported use of multiple products. Most youth who reported nicotine dependence (64.0%) were multiple product users. E-cigarettes were the most common single product used (36.3%) and the product most commonly used in combination with other products; e-cigarettes plus cigarettes (6.7%) was the most common product combination. Combustible product use, smokeless tobacco use, multiple product use and frequent use were associated with greater odds of nicotine dependence. Nicotine dependence among youth is especially influenced by cigarette use, smokeless tobacco use, frequent use of any tobacco product, and multiple product use. Proven tobacco control interventions in coordination with regulatory efforts can reduce youth tobacco product use.

Characteristics of Hospitalized and Nonhospitalized Patients in a Nationwide Outbreak of E-cigarette, or Vaping, Product Use-Associated Lung Injury - United States, November 2019.

CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), state and local health departments, and public health and clinical stakeholders are investigating a nationwide outbreak of e-cigarette, or vaping, product use-associated lung injury (EVALI) (1). As of November 13, 2019, 49 states, the District of Columbia, and two U.S. territories (Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands) have reported 2,172 EVALI cases to CDC, including 42 (1.9%) EVALI-associated deaths. To inform EVALI surveillance, including during the 2019-20 influenza season, case report information supplied by states for hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients with EVALI were analyzed using data collected as of November 5, 2019. Among 2,016 EVALI patients with available data on hospitalization status, 1,906 (95%) were hospitalized, and 110 (5%) were not hospitalized. Demographic characteristics of hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients were similar; most were male (68% of hospitalized versus 65% of nonhospitalized patients), and most were aged <35 years (78% of hospitalized versus 74% of nonhospitalized patients). These patients also reported similar use of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-containing products (83% of hospitalized versus 84% of nonhospitalized patients). Given the similarity between hospitalized and nonhospitalized EVALI patients, the potential for large numbers of respiratory infections during the emerging 2019-20 influenza season, and the potential difficulty in distinguishing EVALI from respiratory infections, CDC will no longer collect national data on nonhospitalized EVALI patients. Further collection of data on nonhospitalized patients will be at the discretion of individual state, local, and territorial health departments. Candidates for outpatient management of EVALI should have normal oxygen saturation (≥95% while breathing room air), no respiratory distress, no comorbidities that might compromise pulmonary reserve, reliable access to care, strong social support systems, and should be able to ensure follow-up within 24-48 hours of initial evaluation and to seek medical care promptly if respiratory symptoms worsen. Health care providers should emphasize the importance of annual influenza vaccination for all persons aged ≥6 months, including persons who use e-cigarette, or vaping, products (2,3).

Exposure to Secondhand Smoke and Secondhand E-Cigarette Aerosol Among Middle and High School Students.

INTRODUCTION: Youth exposure to secondhand smoke (SHS) and secondhand aerosol from e-cigarettes (SHA) may contribute to the renormalization of tobacco product use behaviors. Our study assessed self-reported SHS or SHA exposures in indoor or outdoor public places among US students. METHODS: Data came from the 2015 and 2017 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a school-based survey of US students in grades 6 through 12. Past 30-day exposure to SHS and SHA in indoor and outdoor public places was assessed. The prevalence of exposure was assessed overall and by covariates for each year. We used adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) to assess determinants of exposure. RESULTS: We observed no significant change from 2015 through 2017 in exposure to SHS (52.6% to 50.5%), SHA (25.2% to 25.6%), or either SHS or SHA (56.7% to 55.1%). Following multivariable adjustment, in 2017, exposure to either SHS or SHA in public was higher among female students versus male students (aPR = 1.29), high school students versus middle school students (aPR = 1.15), current e-cigarette users versus nonusers (aPR = 2.89), and current users of other tobacco product versus nonusers (aPR = 1.21). Exposure was higher for students who reported that a household member used tobacco products. CONCLUSION: In 2017, more than half (55.1%, 14.3 million) of US middle and high school students reported exposure to secondhand tobacco product emissions in indoor or outdoor public places. E-cigarette use may complicate the enforcement of existing smoke-free policies and contribute to the renormalization of tobacco use behaviors. Continued efforts are warranted to reduce the social acceptability of tobacco product use and protect bystanders from all tobacco product emissions.

Frequency of Use Among Middle and High School Student Tobacco Product Users - United States, 2015-2017.

Tobacco product use during adolescence increases the risk for lifelong nicotine addiction and immediate adverse health effects (1,2). During 2011-2017, current use of cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, and pipe tobacco decreased significantly among middle and high school students, but current use of e-cigarettes increased significantly from 1.5% to 11.7% (3). In 2017, an estimated 19.6% of high school students (2.95 million) and 5.6% of middle school students (0.67 million) were current users of any tobacco product; e-cigarettes were the most commonly used tobacco product for both middle (3.3%) and high (11.7%) school students (3). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and CDC analyzed combined data from the 2015-2017 National Youth Tobacco Surveys (NYTS) to determine past 30-day (current) frequency of use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, smokeless tobacco, and hookahs among U.S. high school and middle school students. During 2015-2017, the proportion of students currently using tobacco products who used a product for ≥20 of the past 30 days ranged from 14.0% of cigar smokers to 38.7% of smokeless tobacco users among high school students and from 13.1% of e-cigarette users to 24.5% of hookah smokers among middle school students. Among current users, use of two or more tobacco products ranged from 76.7% (e-cigarettes) to 90.9% (hookahs) among those using the product ≥20 of the preceding 30 days, from 68.0% (e-cigarettes) to 84.2% (hookahs) among those using the product for 6 to 19 of the preceding 30 days, and from 48.8% (e-cigarettes) to 77.2% (cigarettes) among those using the product for 1 to 5 of the preceding 30 days. Sustained implementation of proven tobacco control strategies focusing on all types of tobacco products, in coordination with the regulation of tobacco products by FDA, are needed to reduce tobacco product initiation and use among U.S. youths.

Exposure to Secondhand Smoke Among Nonsmokers - United States, 1988-2014.

Exposure to secondhand smoke from burning tobacco products can cause sudden infant death syndrome, respiratory infections, ear infections, and asthma attacks in infants and children, and coronary heart disease, stroke, and lung cancer in adult nonsmokers (1). There is no risk-free level of secondhand smoke exposure (2). CDC analyzed questionnaire and laboratory data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) to assess patterns of secondhand smoke exposure among U.S. nonsmokers. The prevalence of secondhand smoke exposure among U.S. nonsmokers declined substantially during 1988-2014, from 87.5% to 25.2%. However, no change in exposure occurred between 2011-2012 and 2013-2014, and an estimated one in four nonsmokers, or approximately 58 million persons, were still exposed to secondhand smoke during 2013-2014. Moreover, marked disparities persisted across population groups. Exposure prevalence was highest among nonsmokers aged 3-11 years (37.9%), non-Hispanic blacks (50.3%), and those who were living in poverty (47.9%), in rental housing (38.6%), or with someone who smoked inside the home (73.0%), or among persons who had less than a high school education (30.7%). Comprehensive smoke-free laws and policies for workplaces and public places and smoke-free rules for homes and vehicles can further reduce secondhand smoke exposure among all nonsmokers.

Estimates of young breast cancer survivors at risk for infertility in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Standard treatments for breast cancer can impair fertility. It is unknown how many U.S. survivors are at risk for infertility. We estimated the population at risk for infertility secondary to treatment among reproductive-aged breast cancer survivors. METHODS: We combined data from three sources: the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry data on incident breast cancers diagnosed in women aged 15-44 years between 2004 and 2006; treatment data from NPCR's 2004 Breast and Prostate Cancer Data Quality and Patterns of Care (PoC) study; and data on women's intentions to have children from the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). RESULTS: In the cancer registry data, an average of 20,308 women with breast cancer aged <45 years were diagnosed annually. Based on estimates from PoC data, almost all of these survivors (97%, 19,416 women) were hormone receptor positive or received chemotherapy and would be at risk for infertility. These women need information about the impact of treatments on fertility. Estimates based on NSFG data suggest approximately half of these survivors (9,569 women) might want children and could benefit from fertility counseling and fertility preservation. CONCLUSION: Nearly all young breast cancer survivors in the U.S. are at risk for infertility. Physicians should discuss the potential impact of treatment on fertility. A smaller but sizeable number of at-risk survivors may be interested in having children. Given the magnitude of potential infertility and its quality-of-life implications, these survivors should have access to and potential coverage for fertility services.

Accuracy of ovarian and colon cancer risk assessments by U.S. physicians.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown a mismatch between published cancer screening and genetic counseling referral recommendations and physician-reported screening and referral practices. Inaccurate cancer risk assessment is one potential cause of this mismatch. OBJECTIVE: To assess U.S. physicians' ability to accurately determine a woman's colon and ovarian cancer risk level. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional survey of U.S. family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists. A twelve-page questionnaire with a vignette of a woman's annual examination included a question about the patient's level of colon and ovarian cancer risk. The final study sample included 1,555 physicians weighted to represent practicing U.S. physicians nationally. MAIN MEASURE: Accuracy of physicians' ovarian and colon cancer risk assessments. KEY RESULTS: Overall, most physicians accurately assessed women's risk of ovarian (57.0%, CI 54.3, 59.6) and colon cancer (62.0%, CI 59.4, 64.6). However, 27.1% (CI 23.0, 31.6) of physicians overestimated the ovarian cancer risk among women at the same risk as the general population, and 65.1% (CI 60.2, 69.7) underestimated ovarian cancer risk among women at much higher risk than the general population. Physicians overestimated colon more than ovarian cancer risk (38.0%, CI 35.4, 40.6 vs. 27.1%, CI 23.0, 31.6) for women at the same risk as the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians' misestimation of patient ovarian and colon cancer risk may put average risk patients in jeopardy of unnecessary screening and higher risk patients in jeopardy of missed opportunities for prevention or early detection of cancers.

Physicians' beliefs about effectiveness of cancer screening tests: a national survey of family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists.

OBJECTIVE: To study physicians' beliefs about the effectiveness of different tests for cancer screening. METHODS: Data were examined from the Women's Health Survey of 1574 Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Obstetrics-Gynecology physicians to questions about their level of agreement about the clinical effectiveness of different tests for breast, cervical, ovarian, and colorectal cancer screening among average risk women. Data were weighted to the U.S. physician population based on the American Medical Association Masterfile. Multivariable logistic regression identified physician and practice characteristics significantly associated with physicians' beliefs. RESULTS: There were 1574 respondents, representing a 62% response rate. The majority of physicians agreed with the effectiveness of mammography for women aged 50-69years, Pap tests for women aged 21-65years, and colonoscopy for individuals aged ≥50years. A substantial proportion of physicians believed that non-recommended tests were effective for screening (e.g., 34.4% for breast MRI and 69.1% for annual pelvic exam). Physicians typically listed their respective specialty organizations as a top influential organization for screening recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: There were several substantial inconsistencies between physician beliefs in the effectiveness of cancer screening tests and the actual evidence of these tests' effectiveness which can lead both to underuse and overuse of cancer screening tests.

Preventable Premature Deaths from the Five Leading Causes of Death in Nonmetropolitan and Metropolitan Counties, United States, 2010-2022.

Problem/Condition: A 2019 report quantified the higher percentage of potentially excess (preventable) deaths in U.S. nonmetropolitan areas compared with metropolitan areas during 2010-2017. In that report, CDC compared national, regional, and state estimates of preventable premature deaths from the five leading causes of death in nonmetropolitan and metropolitan counties during 2010-2017. This report provides estimates of preventable premature deaths for additional years (2010-2022). Period Covered: 2010-2022. Description of System: Mortality data for U.S. residents from the National Vital Statistics System were used to calculate preventable premature deaths from the five leading causes of death among persons aged <80 years. CDC's National Center for Health Statistics urban-rural classification scheme for counties was used to categorize the deaths according to the urban-rural county classification level of the decedent's county of residence (1: large central metropolitan [most urban], 2: large fringe metropolitan, 3: medium metropolitan, 4: small metropolitan, 5: micropolitan, and 6: noncore [most rural]). Preventable premature deaths were defined as deaths among persons aged <80 years that exceeded the number expected if the death rates for each cause in all states were equivalent to those in the benchmark states (i.e., the three states with the lowest rates). Preventable premature deaths were calculated separately for the six urban-rural county categories nationally, the 10 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services public health regions, and the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Results: During 2010-2022, the percentage of preventable premature deaths among persons aged <80 years in the United States increased for unintentional injury (e.g., unintentional poisoning including drug overdose, unintentional motor vehicle traffic crash, unintentional drowning, and unintentional fall) and stroke, decreased for cancer and chronic lower respiratory disease (CLRD), and remained stable for heart disease. The percentages of preventable premature deaths from the five leading causes of death were higher in rural counties in all years during 2010-2022. When assessed by the six urban-rural county classifications, percentages of preventable premature deaths in the most rural counties (noncore) were consistently higher than in the most urban counties (large central metropolitan and fringe metropolitan) for the five leading causes of death during the study period.During 2010-2022, preventable premature deaths from heart disease increased most in noncore (+9.5%) and micropolitan counties (+9.1%) and decreased most in large central metropolitan counties (-10.2%). Preventable premature deaths from cancer decreased in all county categories, with the largest decreases in large central metropolitan and large fringe metropolitan counties (-100.0%; benchmark achieved in both county categories in 2019). In all county categories, preventable premature deaths from unintentional injury increased, with the largest increases occurring in large central metropolitan (+147.5%) and large fringe metropolitan (+97.5%) counties. Preventable premature deaths from CLRD decreased most in large central metropolitan counties where the benchmark was achieved in 2019 and increased slightly in noncore counties (+0.8%). In all county categories, preventable premature deaths from stroke decreased from 2010 to 2013, remained constant from 2013 to 2019, and then increased in 2020 at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Percentages of preventable premature deaths varied across states by urban-rural county classification during 2010-2022. Interpretation: During 2010-2022, nonmetropolitan counties had higher percentages of preventable premature deaths from the five leading causes of death than did metropolitan counties nationwide, across public health regions, and in most states. The gap between the most rural and most urban counties for preventable premature deaths increased during 2010-2022 for four causes of death (cancer, heart disease, CLRD, and stroke) and decreased for unintentional injury. Urban and suburban counties (large central metropolitan, large fringe metropolitan, medium metropolitan, and small metropolitan) experienced increases in preventable premature deaths from unintentional injury during 2010-2022, leading to a narrower gap between the already high (approximately 69% in 2022) percentage of preventable premature deaths in noncore and micropolitan counties. Sharp increases in preventable premature deaths from unintentional injury, heart disease, and stroke were observed in 2020, whereas preventable premature deaths from CLRD and cancer continued to decline. CLRD deaths decreased during 2017-2020 but increased in 2022. An increase in the percentage of preventable premature deaths for multiple leading causes of death was observed in 2020 and was likely associated with COVID-19-related conditions that contributed to increased mortality from heart disease and stroke. Public Health Action: Routine tracking of preventable premature deaths based on urban-rural county classification might enable public health departments to identify and monitor geographic disparities in health outcomes. These disparities might be related to different levels of access to health care, social determinants of health, and other risk factors. Identifying areas with a high prevalence of potentially preventable mortality might be informative for interventions.

A literature review of the social and psychological needs of ovarian cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and comprehensively present the psychosocial needs of ovarian cancer (OvCa) survivors, including young survivors <45 years of age. METHODS: A literature review was conducted using keywords specific to psychosocial health and OvCa survivorship to identify peer-reviewed, original research articles published in English between January 2000 and December 2010; 28 articles were identified as relevant. Articles were abstracted and results categorized according to six psychosocial domains: quality of life (QoL), social support and relationships, self-image and sexual functioning, psychological distress and functioning, fear of death/recurrence, and personal growth and coping. Findings unique to young survivors are presented when applicable. Psychosocial measurement tools used in relevant studies are also presented. RESULTS: Physical complications and side effects have significant impact on OvCa survivors' psychosocial health. Access to social support services and relational support is critical, as feelings of isolation are common. Survivors report low levels of sexual activity and satisfaction, potentially causing strain on personal relationships, and survivors experience high levels of distress, depression, and anxiety. However, QoL can improve after diagnosis for some OvCa survivors, many of whom report spiritual growth and strengthened personal relationships. Younger survivors are likely to have greater distress and lower QoL compared with older survivors. CONCLUSIONS: OvCa is the deadliest of all gynecologic cancers, greatly impacting the psychosocial health of survivors. Increased awareness of psychosocial health among OvCa survivors themselves, their social support system, and their health care providers is necessary to adequately address their unique needs.

Issues of ovarian cancer survivors in the USA: a literature review.

PURPOSE: As the number of ovarian cancer survivors increases, so does the need for appropriate intervention and care. A literature review was conducted to assess the issues affecting ovarian cancer survivors in the USA, including the needs of younger survivors. METHODS: Articles on six topics (finances/employment, reproductive and sexual health, treatment effects, information needs, genomics, and end-of-life/palliative care) among ovarian cancer survivors were identified through comprehensive database searches. Abstracts for all citations were reviewed to determine relevancy. Data from relevant articles, defined as including a sample size of ≥ 20, published in English, involving human subjects in the USA, and published between 2000 and 2010, were abstracted. RESULTS: Thirty-four articles were relevant. Common, but often unaddressed, treatment side effects included infertility and issues with sexual health. Survivors reported not receiving adequate information about their disease. Hereditary cancer can lead to concern for family members. End-of-life/palliative care was often not addressed by physicians. Most of the studies used a cross-sectional design and lacked control groups. Participants were primarily recruited from academic medical centers or clinical trials and tended to be White. Few studies specifically addressed young survivors; however, reproductive health issues are common. CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer has wide-ranging impacts. This review emphasizes the need for more research among ovarian cancer survivors, particularly related to finances, reproductive and sexual health, information, genomics, and end-of-life care. Issues specific to young survivors also deserve more attention. Direction for future research and clinical implications are discussed.

Vignette-based study of ovarian cancer screening: do U.S. physicians report adhering to evidence-based recommendations?

BACKGROUND: No professional society or group recommends routine ovarian cancer screening, yet physicians' enthusiasm for several cancer screening tests before benefit has been proven suggests that some women may be exposed to potential harms. OBJECTIVE: To provide nationally representative estimates of physicians' reported nonadherence to recommendations against ovarian cancer screening. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of physicians offering women's primary care. The 12-page questionnaire contained a woman's annual examination vignette and questions about offers or orders for transvaginal ultrasonography (TVU) and cancer antigen 125 (CA-125). SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: 3200 physicians randomly sampled equally from the 2008 American Medical Association Physician Masterfile lists of family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists; 61.7% responded. After exclusions, 1088 respondents were included; their responses were weighted to represent the specialty distribution of practicing U.S. physicians nationally. MEASUREMENTS: Reported nonadherence to screening recommendations (defined as sometimes or almost always ordering screening TVU or CA-125 or both). RESULTS: Twenty-eight percent (95% CI, 24.5% to 32.9%) of physicians reported nonadherence to screening recommendations for women at low risk for ovarian cancer; 65.4% (CI, 61.1% to 69.4%) did so for women at medium risk for ovarian cancer. Six percent (CI, 4.4% to 8.9%) reported routinely ordering or offering ovarian cancer screening for low-risk women, as did 24.0% (CI, 20.5% to 28.0%) for medium-risk women (P ≤ 0.001). Thirty-three percent believed TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test. In adjusted analysis, actual and physician-perceived patient risk, patient request for ovarian cancer screening, and physician belief that TVU or CA-125 was an effective screening test were the strongest predictors of physician-reported nonadherence to published recommendations. LIMITATION: The results are limited by their reliance on survey methods; there may be respondent-nonrespondent bias. CONCLUSION: One in 3 physicians believed that ovarian cancer screening was effective, despite evidence to the contrary. Substantial proportions of physicians reported routinely offering or ordering ovarian cancer screening, thereby exposing women to the documented risks of these tests. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute.

Racial Disparities in Flavored Tobacco Product Use, Curiosity, Susceptibility, and Harm Perception, National Youth Tobacco Survey 2019-2020.

Introduction: Studies characterizing differences in youth flavored tobacco product use prevalence, curiosity/susceptibility, and harm perceptions by race and ethnicity are limited. This study comprehensively examines flavored tobacco product use and harm perceptions among U.S. middle and high school students, by race and ethnicity. Methods: Data came from the 2019 (N=19,018) and 2020 (N=14,531) National Youth Tobacco Surveys (NYTS). Weighted prevalence estimates of flavored tobacco product use and curiosity, susceptibility, and harm perception are reported by race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic [NH] White, NH Black, Hispanic, or NH Other). t-Tests assessed differences in prevalence by years and racial/ethnic groups. Results: Among youth with past 30-day tobacco use, use of most flavored tobacco products increased across all racial/ethnic groups; the largest increase was observed among Hispanic youth using other flavored tobacco products (30.3%). The group with the highest susceptibility to future electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) use was Hispanic students (42.3%). Hispanic students had the highest curiosity about and susceptibility to future use of cigarettes and cigars as well. Conclusions: Increases in the use of and higher susceptibility to other flavored tobacco products, particularly among Hispanic youth, suggest a need for additional changes in environmental conditions and possibly targeted or tailored tobacco control interventions for Hispanic youth. Implications: Given that flavored tobacco use is prevalent among youth and aggressively marketed more to racial/ethnic minority populations, it is important to understand how susceptibility and perceptions relate to tobacco use. Our results suggest a need for a better understanding of social and environmental factors that drive tobacco use behaviors and perceptions, particularly among Hispanic youth, to address the root causes of these differences and create more equitable tobacco control interventions.

Tobacco Cessation Behaviors Among U.S. Middle and High School Students, 2020.

PURPOSE: The landscape of youth tobacco product use has changed dramatically in recent years; however, little is known about current youth cessation behaviors. This study aims to assess prevalence and correlates of quit intentions and past-year quit attempts among U.S. middle and high school students who report current use of any tobacco product, cigarettes, and e-cigarettes. METHODS: Data came from the 2020 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a nationally representative cross-sectional school-based survey of students in grades 6-12. Weighed prevalence estimates of quit intentions and past-year quit attempts among users of any tobacco product, cigarettes, and e-cigarettes are presented. Multivariable-adjusted logistic regression with predictive marginals was used to assess sociodemographic correlates of quit intentions and quit attempts for each tobacco product user group. RESULTS: Quit intentions were reported by 62.5% of current users of any tobacco product, 68.1% of cigarette smokers, and 63.9% of e-cigarette users. Similarly, past-year quit attempts were reported by 65.4% of current users of any tobacco product, 65.8% of cigarettes smokers, and 67.4% for e-cigarette users. Harm perceptions toward tobacco, nicotine dependency, and the use of ≥2 tobacco products were significantly correlated with quit intentions, quit attempts, or both among different tobacco product user groups. CONCLUSIONS: Most students who use tobacco products want to quit and have attempted to do so. Development of youth-focused cessation interventions, particularly those addressing the most commonly used products, could potentially accelerate progress in a comprehensive approach to youth tobacco prevention and control.