Protocol to measure validity and reliability of colorectal, breast, cervical and lung cancer screening questions from the 2021 National Health Interview Survey: Methodology and design.

Previous studies demonstrate that self-reports of mammography screening for breast cancer and colonoscopy screening for colorectal cancer demonstrate concordance, based on adherence to screening guidelines, with electronic medical records (EMRs) in over 90% of those interviewed, as well as high sensitivity and specificity, and can be used for monitoring our Healthy People goals. However, for screening tests for cervical and lung cancers, and for various sub-populations, concordance between self-report and EMRs has been noticeably lower with poor sensitivity or specificity. This study aims to test the validity and reliability of lung, colorectal, cervical, and breast cancer screening questions from the 2021 and 2022 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). We present the protocol for a study designed to measure the validity and reliability of the NHIS cancer screening questions compared to EMRs from four US-based healthcare systems. We planned a randomized trial of a phone- vs web-based survey with NHIS questions that were previously revised based on extensive cognitive interviewing. Our planned sample size will be 1576 validity interviews, and 1260 interviews randomly assigned at 1 or 3 months after the initial interview. We are enrolling people eligible for cancer screening based on age, sex, and smoking history per US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. We will evaluate question validity using concordance, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and report-to-records ratio. We further are randomizing participants to complete a second survey 1 vs 3 months later to assess question reliability. We suggest that typical measures of concordance may need to be reconsidered in evaluating cancer screening questions.

Evaluation of Algorithms Using Automated Health Plan Data to Identify Breast Cancer Recurrences.

BACKGROUND: We updated algorithms to identify breast cancer recurrences from administrative data, extending previously developed methods. METHODS: In this validation study, we evaluated pairs of breast cancer recurrence algorithms (vs. individual algorithms) to identify recurrences. We generated algorithm combinations that categorized discordant algorithm results as no recurrence [High Specificity and PPV (positive predictive value) Combination] or recurrence (High Sensitivity Combination). We compared individual and combined algorithm results to manually abstracted recurrence outcomes from a sample of 600 people with incident stage I-IIIA breast cancer diagnosed between 2004 and 2015. We used Cox regression to evaluate risk factors associated with age- and stage-adjusted recurrence rates using different recurrence definitions, weighted by inverse sampling probabilities. RESULTS: Among 600 people, we identified 117 recurrences using the High Specificity and PPV Combination, 505 using the High Sensitivity Combination, and 118 using manual abstraction. The High Specificity and PPV Combination had good specificity [98%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 97-99] and PPV (72%, 95% CI: 63-80) but modest sensitivity (64%, 95% CI: 44-80). The High Sensitivity Combination had good sensitivity (80%, 95% CI: 49-94) and specificity (83%, 95% CI: 80-86) but low PPV (29%, 95% CI: 25-34). Recurrence rates using combined algorithms were similar in magnitude for most risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: By combining algorithms, we identified breast cancer recurrences with greater PPV than individual algorithms, without additional review of discordant records. IMPACT: Researchers should consider tradeoffs between accuracy and manual chart abstraction resources when using previously developed algorithms. We provided guidance for future studies that use breast cancer recurrence algorithms with or without supplemental manual chart abstraction.

Development and evaluation of a method to assess breast cancer risk using a longitudinal history of mammographic density: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Women with dense breasts have an increased risk of breast cancer. However, breast density is measured with variability, which may reduce the reliability and accuracy of its association with breast cancer risk. This is particularly relevant when visually assessing breast density due to variation in inter- and intra-reader assessments. To address this issue, we developed a longitudinal breast density measure which uses an individual woman's entire history of mammographic density, and we evaluated its association with breast cancer risk as well as its predictive ability. METHODS: In total, 132,439 women, aged 40-73 yr, who were enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington and had multiple screening mammograms taken between 1996 and 2013 were followed up for invasive breast cancer through 2014. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density was assessed at each screen. Continuous and derived categorical longitudinal density measures were developed using a linear mixed model that allowed for longitudinal density to be updated at each screen. Predictive ability was assessed using (1) age and body mass index-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for breast density (time-varying covariate), (2) likelihood-ratio statistics (ΔLR-χ2) and (3) concordance indices. RESULTS: In total, 2704 invasive breast cancers were diagnosed during follow-up (median = 5.2 yr; median mammograms per woman = 3). When compared with an age- and body mass index-only model, the gain in statistical information provided by the continuous longitudinal density measure was 23% greater than that provided by BI-RADS density (follow-up after baseline mammogram: ΔLR-χ2 = 379.6 (degrees of freedom (df) = 2) vs. 307.7 (df = 3)), which increased to 35% (ΔLR-χ2 = 251.2 vs. 186.7) for follow-up after three mammograms (n = 76,313, 2169 cancers). There was a sixfold difference in observed risk between densest and fattiest eight-category longitudinal density (HR = 6.3, 95% CI 4.7-8.7), versus a fourfold difference with BI-RADS density (HR = 4.3, 95% CI 3.4-5.5). Discriminatory accuracy was marginally greater for longitudinal versus BI-RADS density (c-index = 0.64 vs. 0.63, mean difference = 0.008, 95% CI 0.003-0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Estimating mammographic density using a woman's history of breast density is likely to be more reliable than using the most recent observation only, which may lead to more reliable and accurate estimates of individual breast cancer risk. Longitudinal breast density has the potential to improve personal breast cancer risk estimation in women attending mammography screening.

Racial and Ethnic Variation in Diagnostic Mammography Performance among Women Reporting a Breast Lump.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated diagnostic mammography among women with a breast lump to determine whether performance varied across racial and ethnic groups. METHODS: This study included 51,014 diagnostic mammograms performed between 2005 and 2018 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium among Asian/Pacific Islander (12%), Black (7%), Hispanic/Latina (6%), and White (75%) women reporting a lump. Breast cancers occurring within 1 year were ascertained from cancer registry linkages. Multivariable regression was used to adjust performance statistic comparisons for breast cancer risk factors, mammogram modality, demographics, additional imaging, and imaging facility. RESULTS: Cancer detection rates were highest among Asian/Pacific Islander [per 1,000 exams, 84.2 (95% confidence interval (CI): 72.0-98.2)] and Black women [81.4 (95% CI: 69.4-95.2)] and lowest among Hispanic/Latina women [42.9 (95% CI: 34.2-53.6)]. Positive predictive values (PPV) were higher among Black [37.0% (95% CI: 31.2-43.3)] and White [37.0% (95% CI: 30.0-44.6)] women and lowest among Hispanic/Latina women [22.0% (95% CI: 17.2-27.7)]. False-positive results were most common among Asian/Pacific Islander women [per 1,000 exams, 183.9 (95% CI: 126.7-259.2)] and lowest among White women [112.4 (95% CI: 86.1-145.5)]. After adjustment, false-positive and cancer detection rates remained higher for Asian/Pacific Islander and Black women (vs. Hispanic/Latina and White). Adjusted PPV was highest among Asian/Pacific Islander women. CONCLUSIONS: Among women with a lump, Asian/Pacific Islander and Black women were more likely to have cancer detected and more likely to receive a false-positive result compared with White and Hispanic/Latina women. IMPACT: Strategies for optimizing diagnostic mammography among women with a lump may vary by racial/ethnic group, but additional factors that influence performance differences need to be identified. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1479.

Risk of second primary cancer among women in the Kaiser Permanente Breast Cancer Survivors Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer survivors are living longer due to early detection and advances in treatment and are at increased risk for second primary cancers. Comprehensive evaluation of second cancer risk among patients treated in recent decades is lacking. METHODS: We identified 16,004 females diagnosed with a first primary stage I-III breast cancer between 1990 and 2016 (followed through 2017) and survived ≥ 1 year at Kaiser Permanente (KP) Colorado, Northwest, and Washington. Second cancer was defined as an invasive primary cancer diagnosed ≥ 12 months after the first primary breast cancer. Second cancer risk was evaluated for all cancers (excluding ipsilateral breast cancer) using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), and a competing risk approach for cumulative incidence and hazard ratios (HRs) adjusted for KP center, treatment, age, and year of first cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 6.2 years, 1,562 women developed second cancer. Breast cancer survivors had a 70% higher risk of any cancer (95%CI = 1.62-1.79) and 45% higher risk of non-breast cancer (95%CI = 1.37-1.54) compared with the general population. SIRs were highest for malignancies of the peritoneum (SIR = 3.44, 95%CI = 1.65-6.33), soft tissue (SIR = 3.32, 95%CI = 2.51-4.30), contralateral breast (SIR = 3.10, 95%CI = 2.82-3.40), and acute myeloid leukemia (SIR = 2.11, 95%CI = 1.18-3.48)/myelodysplastic syndrome (SIR = 3.25, 95%CI = 1.89-5.20). Women also had elevated risks for oral, colon, pancreas, lung, and uterine corpus cancer, melanoma, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (SIR range = 1.31-1.97). Radiotherapy was associated with increased risk for all second cancers (HR = 1.13, 95%CI = 1.01-1.25) and soft tissue sarcoma (HR = 2.36, 95%CI = 1.17-4.78), chemotherapy with decreased risk for all second cancers (HR = 0.87, 95%CI = 0.78-0.98) and increased myelodysplastic syndrome risk (HR = 3.01, 95%CI = 1.01-8.94), and endocrine therapy with lower contralateral breast cancer risk (HR = 0.48, 95%CI = 0.38-0.60). Approximately 1 in 9 women who survived ≥ 1 year developed second cancer, 1 in 13 developed second non-breast cancer, and 1 in 30 developed contralateral breast cancer by 10 years. Trends in cumulative incidence declined for contralateral breast cancer but not for second non-breast cancers. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated risks of second cancer among breast cancer survivors treated in recent decades suggests that heightened surveillance is warranted and continued efforts to reduce second cancers are needed.

Cumulative 6-Year Risk of Screen-Detected Ductal Carcinoma In Situ by Screening Frequency.

Importance: Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) by mammography screening is a controversial outcome with potential benefits and harms. The association of mammography screening interval and woman's risk factors with the likelihood of DCIS detection after multiple screening rounds is poorly understood. Objective: To develop a 6-year risk prediction model for screen-detected DCIS according to mammography screening interval and women's risk factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium cohort study assessed women aged 40 to 74 years undergoing mammography screening (digital mammography or digital breast tomosynthesis) from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2020, at breast imaging facilities within 6 geographically diverse registries of the consortium. Data were analyzed between February and June 2022. Exposures: Screening interval (annual, biennial, or triennial), age, menopausal status, race and ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, benign breast biopsy history, breast density, body mass index, age at first birth, and false-positive mammography history. Main Outcomes and Measures: Screen-detected DCIS defined as a DCIS diagnosis within 12 months after a positive screening mammography result, with no concurrent invasive disease. Results: A total of 916 931 women (median [IQR] age at baseline, 54 [46-62] years; 12% Asian, 9% Black, 5% Hispanic/Latina, 69% White, 2% other or multiple races, and 4% missing) met the eligibility criteria, with 3757 screen-detected DCIS diagnoses. Screening round-specific risk estimates from multivariable logistic regression were well calibrated (expected-observed ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.97-1.03) with a cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.639 (95% CI, 0.630-0.648). Cumulative 6-year risk of screen-detected DCIS estimated from screening round-specific risk estimates, accounting for competing risks of death and invasive cancer, varied widely by all included risk factors. Cumulative 6-year screen-detected DCIS risk increased with age and shorter screening interval. Among women aged 40 to 49 years, the mean 6-year screen-detected DCIS risk was 0.30% (IQR, 0.21%-0.37%) for annual screening, 0.21% (IQR, 0.14%-0.26%) for biennial screening, and 0.17% (IQR, 0.12%-0.22%) for triennial screening. Among women aged 70 to 74 years, the mean cumulative risks were 0.58% (IQR, 0.41%-0.69%) after 6 annual screens, 0.40% (IQR, 0.28%-0.48%) for 3 biennial screens, and 0.33% (IQR, 0.23%-0.39%) after 2 triennial screens. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, 6-year screen-detected DCIS risk was higher with annual screening compared with biennial or triennial screening intervals. Estimates from the prediction model, along with risk estimates of other screening benefits and harms, could help inform policy makers' discussions of screening strategies.

Treatment-related thoracic soft tissue sarcomas in US breast cancer survivors: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Soft tissue sarcoma is a rare but serious side-effect of radiotherapy to treat breast cancer, and rates are increasing in the USA. We evaluated potential co-factors in two complimentary cohorts of US breast cancer survivors. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we sourced data from the Kaiser Permanente (KP) cohort and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) 13 registries cohort, both in the USA. The KP cohort included 15 940 women diagnosed with breast cancer from Jan 1, 1990, to Dec 31, 2016, in KP Colorado, KP Northwest (which serves Oregon and Southwest Washington state), or KP Washington, with detailed treatment data and comorbidities (including hypertension and diabetes at or before breast cancer diagnosis) from electronic medical records. The SEER cohort included 457 300 women diagnosed with breast cancer from Jan 1, 1992, to Dec 31, 2016, within the 13 SEER registries across the USA, with initial treatment data (yes vs no or unknown). Eligibility criteria in both cohorts were female breast cancer survivors (stage I-III) aged 20-84 years at diagnosis who had breast cancer surgery, and had survived at least 1 year after breast cancer diagnosis. The outcome of interest was any second thoracic soft tissue sarcoma (angiosarcomas and other subtypes) that developed at least 1 year after breast cancer diagnosis. Risk factors for thoracic soft tissue sarcoma were assessed using multivariable Poisson regression models. FINDINGS: In the KP cohort, median follow-up was 9·3 years (IQR 5·7-13·9) and 19 (0·1%) of 15 940 eligible, evaluable women developed a thoracic soft tissue sarcoma (11 angiosarcomas, eight other subtypes). Most (94·7%; 18 of 19) thoracic soft tissue sarcomas occurred in women treated with radiotherapy; thus, radiotherapy was associated with a significantly increased risk of developing a thoracic soft tissue sarcoma (relative risk [RR] 8·1 [95% CI 1·1-60·4]; p=0·0052), but there was no association with prescribed dose, fractionation, or boost. The RR of angiosarcoma after anthracyclines was 3·6 (95% CI 1·0-13·3; p=0·058). Alkylating agents were associated with an increased risk of developing other sarcomas (RR 7·7 [95% CI 1·2-150·8]; p=0·026). History of hypertension (RR 4·8 [95% CI 1·3-17·6]; p=0·017) and diabetes (5·3 [1·4-20·8]; p=0·036) were each associated with around a five-times increased risk of angiosarcoma. In the SEER cohort, 430 (0·1%) of 457 300 patients had subsequent thoracic soft tissue sarcomas (268 angiosarcomas and 162 other subtypes) after a median follow-up of 8·3 years (IQR 4·3-13·9). Most (77·9%; 335 of 430) cases occurred after radiotherapy; thus, radiotherapy was associated with a significantly increased risk of developing a thoracic soft tissue sarcoma (RR 3·0 [95% CI 2·4-3·8]; p<0·0001) and, for angiosarcomas, the RR for breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy versus mastectomy plus radiotherapy was 1·9 (1·1-3·3; p=0·012). By 10 years after radiotherapy, the cumulative incidence of thoracic soft tissue sarcoma was 0·21% (95% CI 0·12-0·34) in the KP cohort and 0·15% (95% CI 0·13-0·17) in SEER. INTERPRETATION: Radiotherapy was the strongest risk factor for thoracic soft tissue sarcoma in both cohorts. This finding, along with the novel findings for diabetes and hypertension as potential risk factors for angiosarcomas, warrant further investigation as potential targets for prevention strategies and increased surveillance. FUNDING: US National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health.

Diagnostic Mammography Performance across Racial and Ethnic Groups in a National Network of Community-Based Breast Imaging Facilities.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated differences in diagnostic mammography performance based on women's race/ethnicity. METHODS: This cohort study included 267,868 diagnostic mammograms performed to evaluate screening mammogram findings at 98 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium between 2005 and 2017. Mammogram assessments were recorded prospectively and breast cancers occurring within one year were ascertained. Performance statistics were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each racial/ethnic group. Multivariable regression was used to control for personal characteristics and imaging facility. RESULTS: Among non-Hispanic White (70%), non-Hispanic Black (13%), Asian/Pacific Islander (10%), and Hispanic (7%) women, the invasive cancer detection rate (iCDR, per 1,000 mammograms) and positive predictive value (PPV2) were highest among non-Hispanic White women (iCDR, 35.8; 95% CI, 35.0-36.7; PPV2, 27.8; 95% CI, 27.3-28.3) and lowest among Hispanic women (iCDR, 22.3; 95% CI, 20.2-24.6; PPV2, 19.4; 95% CI, 18.0-20.9). Short interval follow-up recommendations were most common among non-Hispanic Black women [(31.0%; 95% CI, 30.6%-31.5%) vs. other groups, range, 16.6%-23.6%]. False-positive biopsy recommendations were most common among Asian/Pacific Islander women [per 1,000 mammograms: 169.2; 95% CI, 164.8-173.7) vs. other groups, range, 126.5-136.1]. Some differences were explained by adjusting for receipt of diagnostic ultrasound or MRI for iCDR and imaging facility for short-interval follow-up. Other differences changed little after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic mammography performance varied across racial/ethnic groups. Addressing characteristics related to imaging facility and access, rather than personal characteristics, may help reduce some of these disparities. IMPACT: Diagnostic mammography performance studies should include racially and ethnically diverse populations to provide an accurate view of the population-level effects.

Mammographic Density Decline, Tamoxifen Response, and Prognosis by Molecular Characteristics of Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic breast density (MBD) decline post-tamoxifen initiation is a favorable prognostic factor in estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer (BC) and has potential utility as a biomarker of tamoxifen response. However, the prognostic value of MBD decline may vary by molecular characteristics among ER-positive patients. METHODS: We investigated associations between MBD decline (≥10% vs <10%) and breast cancer-specific mortality (BCSM) among ER-positive breast cancer patients aged 36-87 years at diagnosis treated with tamoxifen at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (1990-2008). Patients who died of BC (case patients; n = 62) were compared with those who did not (control patients; n = 215) overall and by tumor molecular characteristics (immunohistochemistry [IHC]-based subtype [luminal A-like: ER-positive/progesterone receptor [PR]-positive/HER2-negative/low Ki67; luminal B-like: ER-positive and 1 or more of PR-negative, HER2-positive, high Ki67] and modified IHC [mIHC]-based recurrence score of ER/PR/Ki67). Percent MBD was measured in the unaffected breast at baseline mammogram (mean = 6 months before tamoxifen initiation) and follow-up (mean = 12 months post-tamoxifen initiation). Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were computed from logistic regression models. All statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: MBD decline was statistically significantly associated with reduced risk of BCSM overall (OR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.15 to 0.92). This association was, however, stronger among women with aggressive tumor characteristics including luminal B-like (OR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.04 to 0.73) vs A-like (OR = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.19 to 2.92); large (OR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.08 to 0.78) vs small (OR = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.04 to 3.79) tumors; PR-negative (OR = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.001 to 0.37) vs PR-positive (OR = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.18 to 1.40) disease; and high (OR = 0.25, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.93) vs low (OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.10 to 2.09) mIHC3 score. CONCLUSION: The findings support MBD decline as a prognostic marker of tamoxifen response among patients with aggressive ER-positive BC phenotypes, for whom understanding treatment effectiveness is critical.

Changes in use of opioid therapy after colon cancer diagnosis: a population-based study.

PURPOSE: To describe patterns of opioid use in cancer survivors. METHODS: In a cohort study of colon cancer patients diagnosed during 1995-2014 and enrolled at two Kaiser Permanente regions, we constructed quarterly measures of opioid use from 1 year before cancer diagnosis through 5 years after diagnosis to examine changes in use. Measures included any use, incident use, regular use (use ≥ 45 days in a 91-day quarter), and average daily dose (converted to morphine milligram equivalent, MME). We also assessed temporal trends of opioid use. RESULTS: Of 2,039 colon cancer patients, 11-15% received opioids in the four pre-diagnosis quarters, 68% in the first quarter after diagnosis, and 15-17% in each subsequent 19 quarters. Regular opioid use increased from 3 to 5% pre-diagnosis to 5-7% post diagnosis. Average dose increased from 15 to 17 MME/day pre-diagnosis to 14-22 MME/day post diagnosis (excluding the quarter in which cancer was diagnosed). Among post-diagnosis opioid users, 73-95% were on a low dose (< 20 MME/day). Over years, regular use of opioids increased in survivorship with no change in dosage. CONCLUSION: Opioid use slightly increased following a colon cancer diagnosis, but high-dose use was rare. Research is needed to differentiate under- versus over-treatment of cancer pain.

Involution of Breast Lobules, Mammographic Breast Density and Prognosis Among Tamoxifen-Treated Estrogen Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer Patients.

Mammographic breast density (MD) reflects breast fibroglandular content. Its decline following adjuvant tamoxifen treated, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer has been associated with improved outcomes. Breast cancers arise from structures termed lobules, and lower MD is associated with increased age-related lobule involution. We assessed whether pre-treatment involution influenced associations between MD decline and risk of breast cancer-specific death. ER-positive tamoxifen treated patients diagnosed at Kaiser Permanente Northwest (1990-2008) were defined as cases who died of breast cancer (n = 54) and matched controls (remained alive over similar follow-up; n = 180). Lobule involution was assessed by examining terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs) in benign tissues surrounding cancers as TDLU count/mm2, median span and acini count/TDLU. MD (%) was measured in the unaffected breast at baseline (median 6-months before) and follow-up (median 12-months after tamoxifen initiation). TDLU measures and baseline MD were positively associated among controls (p < 0.05). In multivariable regression models, MD decline (≥10%) was associated with reduced risk of breast cancer-specific death before (odds ratio (OR): 0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.92) and after (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.18-0.94) adjustment for TDLU count/mm2, TDLU span (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.14-0.84), and acini count/TDLU (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.81). MD decline following adjuvant tamoxifen is associated with reduced risk of breast cancer-specific death, irrespective of pre-treatment lobule involution.

Screening for Pancreatic Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the third most common cause of cancer death among men and women in the United States. Objective: To systematically review benefits and harms of screening for pancreatic adenocarcinoma to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force. Data Sources: MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, from January 2002 through April 27, 2018; surveillance through March 22, 2019. Study Selection: Studies of adults with or without risk factors for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (eg, family history of pancreatic cancer, personal history of new-onset diabetes) undergoing imaging-based screening; studies of treatment for adults with screen-detected or asymptomatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Included study designs were randomized clinical trials, nonrandomized controlled intervention studies, diagnostic accuracy studies with a reference standard, cohort studies, and case-control studies (for evaluation of harms only). Studies consisting entirely of populations with known genetic syndromes associated with pancreatic cancer were excluded. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Two investigators independently reviewed abstracts and full-text articles and rated included studies for quality; data were quantitatively analyzed to calculate a pooled diagnostic yield and narratively synthesized. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality, morbidity, or quality of life; diagnostic accuracy of screening tests; any harm of screening or treatment. Results: Thirteen fair-quality prospective cohort screening studies (N = 1317) conducted predominantly in populations at high familial risk for pancreatic adenocarcinoma were included. No studies reported on the effect of screening on morbidity or mortality or on the effectiveness of treatment for screen-detected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Although no studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests, all 13 studies reported the diagnostic yield. Yields ranged from 0 to 75 cases per 1000 persons in studies using endoscopic ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and/or computed tomography-based screening. In total, 18 cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma were detected in 1156 adults at increased familial risk and 0 cases were detected in 161 average-risk adults. In 8 studies (n = 675) assessing procedural harms of screening, no serious harms from initial screening were reported. Two studies (n = 271) found no evidence of psychosocial harms related to screening. Evidence of surgical harms was limited. Conclusions and Relevance: Imaging-based screening in groups at high familial risk can detect pancreatic adenocarcinoma with limited evidence of minimal harms. However, the effect of screening on morbidity and mortality in groups at high familial risk has not been studied, and no data are available in average-risk populations. There is limited evidence to assess benefits or harms of surgical intervention for screen-detected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Hospitalization Risk During Chemotherapy for Advanced Cancer: Development and Validation of Risk Stratification Models Using Real-World Data.

PURPOSE: Hospitalizations are a common occurrence during chemotherapy for advanced cancer. Validated risk stratification tools could facilitate proactive approaches for reducing hospitalizations by identifying at-risk patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We assembled two retrospective cohorts of patients receiving chemotherapy for advanced nonhematologic cancer; cohorts were drawn from three integrated health plans of the Cancer Research Network. We used these cohorts to develop and validate logistic regression models estimating 30-day hospitalization risk after chemotherapy initiation. The development cohort included patients in two health plans from 2005 to 2013. The validation cohort included patients in a third health plan from 2007 to 2016. Candidate predictor variables were derived from clinical data in institutional data warehouses. Models were validated based on the C-statistic, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value. Positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated in reference to a prespecified risk threshold (hospitalization risk ≥ 18.0%). RESULTS: There were 3,606 patients in the development cohort (median age, 63 years) and 634 evaluable patients in the validation cohort (median age, 64 years). Lung cancer was the most common diagnosis in both cohorts (26% and 31%, respectively). The selected risk stratification model included two variables: albumin and sodium. The model C-statistic in the validation cohort was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.62 to 0.75); 39% of patients were classified as high risk according to the prespecified threshold; 30-day hospitalization risk was 24.2% (95% CI, 19.9% to 32.0%) in the high-risk group and 8.7% (95% CI, 6.1% to 12.0%) in the low-risk group. CONCLUSION: A model based on data elements routinely collected during cancer treatment can reliably identify patients at high risk for hospitalization after chemotherapy initiation. Additional research is necessary to determine whether this model can be deployed to prevent chemotherapy-related hospitalizations.

Cognitive Resilience to Alzheimer's Disease Pathology in the Human Brain.

BACKGROUND: Past research has focused on risk factors for developing dementia, with increasing recognition of "resilient" people who live to old age with intact cognitive function despite pathological features of Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate demographic factors, mid-life characteristics, and non-AD neuropathology findings that may be associated with cognitive resilience to AD pathology. METHODS: We analyzed data from 276 autopsy cases with intermediate or high levels of AD pathology from the Adult Changes in Thought study. We defined cognitive resilience as having Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument scores ≥86 within two years of death and no clinical dementia diagnosis; non-resilient people had dementia diagnoses from AD or other causes before death. We compared mid-life characteristics, demographics, and additional neuropathology findings between resilient and non-resilient people. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for being resilient compared to not being resilient adjusting for demographic and neuropathology factors. RESULTS: We classified 68 (25%) people as resilient and 208 (75%) as not resilient. A greater proportion of resilient people had a college degree (50%) compared with non-resilient (32%, p = 0.01). The odds of being resilient were significantly increased among people with a college education (OR = 2.01, 95% CI = 1.01-3.99) and significantly reduced among people with additional non-AD neuropathology findings such as hippocampal sclerosis (OR = 0.28, 95% CI = 0.09-0.89) and microinfarcts (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.15-0.78). CONCLUSION: Increased education and absence of non-AD pathology may be independently associated with cognitive resilience, highlighting the importance of evaluating co-morbid factors in future research on mechanisms of cognitive resilience.

Use of antidepressants after colon cancer diagnosis and risk of recurrence.

OBJECTIVE: Prior research examining the association between use of antidepressants after colon cancer diagnosis and risk of recurrence is scant. We evaluated this association among colon cancer patients diagnosed at two integrated health care delivery systems in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of stage I to IIIA colon cancer patients diagnosed at greater than or equal to 18 years of age at Kaiser Permanente Colorado and Kaiser Permanente Washington during 1995 to 2014. We used pharmacy records to identify dispensings for antidepressants and tumor registry records and patients' medical charts to identify cancer recurrences. Using Cox proportional hazards models, we estimated the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of colon cancer recurrence comparing patients who used antidepressants after diagnosis to those who did not. We also evaluated the risk associated with use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) separately. RESULTS: Among the 1923 eligible colon cancer patients, 807 (42%) used an antidepressant after diagnosis and 139 had a colon cancer recurrence during an average 5.6 years of follow-up. Use of antidepressants after colon cancer diagnosis was not associated with risk of recurrence (HR: 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-1.87). The HR for use of SSRIs was 1.22 (95% CI, 0.64-2.30), and for TCAs, it was 1.18 (95% CI, 0.68-2.07). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that use of antidepressants after colon cancer diagnosis was common and not associated with risk of recurrence. Future larger studies with greater power to examine risk associated with individual antidepressants would be valuable additions to the evidence base.

Proton Pump Inhibitor Use and Dementia Risk: Prospective Population-Based Study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether higher cumulative proton pump inhibitor (PPI) exposure is associated with greater dementia risk. DESIGN: Prospective population-based cohort study. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Washington, an integrated healthcare delivery system in Seattle, Washington. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 65 and older without dementia at study entry (N = 3,484). MEASUREMENTS: Participants were screened for dementia every 2 years, and those who screened positive underwent extensive evaluation. Dementia outcomes were determined using standard diagnostic criteria. Time-varying PPI exposure was determined from computerized pharmacy data and consisted of total standardized daily doses (TSDDs) dispensed to an individual in the prior 10 years. We also assessed duration of use. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate the association between PPI exposure and time to dementia or Alzheimer's disease (AD). RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up of 7.5 years, 827 participants (23.7%) developed dementia (670 with possible or probable AD). PPI exposure was not associated with risk of dementia (P = .66) or AD (P = .77). For dementia, the risk for specific levels of cumulative exposure compared to no use was: 365 TSDDs (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.18), 1,095 TSDDs (HR 0.99, CI 0.75-1.30) and 1,825 TSDDs (HR 1.13, CI 0.82-1.56). These TSDD levels represent approximately 1, 3 and 5 years of daily use respectively. Duration of PPI use was not associated with dementia outcomes either. CONCLUSION: Proton pump inhibitor use was not associated with dementia risk, even for people with high cumulative exposure. Although there are other safety concerns with long-term PPI use, results from our study do not support that these medications should be avoided out of concern about dementia risk.

Breast cancer screening outreach effectiveness: Mammogram-specific reminders vs. comprehensive preventive services birthday letters.

We compared the effectiveness of two outreach strategies on timely mammography adherence: a mammogram-specific reminder letter (sent just before a woman was due) to a birthday letter (addresses multiple preventive services and not timed around due dates). We evaluated screening mammography adherence following 79,848 mammogram-specific and 151,626 birthday letters mailed between 2002 and 2012 to women aged 40-74years enrolled in Kaiser Permanente Washington. Screening mammogram adherence was specifically tied to due date and was evaluated separately by age group and up-to-date or overdue status at the time of mailing. We used generalized estimating equations to account for correlation between repeated observations, to model the odds of screening mammography adherence by letter type. Among women up-to-date, adherence following birthday letters was 22-76% lower compared to the mammogram-specific reminders, with the greatest decreases in adherence in women aged 70-74. Birthday letters were more effective at activating screening uptake among some subgroups of overdue women aged 50-69 and most overdue women aged 70-74, but universally low adherence rates were observed in overdue women. Increasing number of recommended services for women aged 50-74 who were up-to-date resulted in 12-17% lower mammography adherence, but had no effect in women aged 40-49 or in overdue women. Birthday letters are less effective than mammogram-specific reminder letters at prompting women to undergo timely breast cancer screening, particularly among women up-to-date with screening. Birthday letters may be effective at increasing overall preventive care; however, supplemental outreach may be needed around the due date to increase timely preventive services receipt.

Anesthesia Exposure and Risk of Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the associations between anesthesia and dementia or Alzheimer's disease (AD) risk using prospectively collected data. DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Community-dwelling members of the Adult Changes in Thought cohort aged 65 and older and free of dementia at baseline (N = 3,988). MEASUREMENTS: Participants self-reported all prior surgical procedures with general or neuraxial (spinal or epidural) anesthesia at baseline and reported new procedures every 2 years. People undergoing high-risk surgery with general anesthesia, other surgery with general anesthesia, and other surgery with neuraxial anesthesia exposures were compared with those with no surgery and no anesthesia. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dementia and AD associated with time-varying lifetime and recent (past 5 years) anesthesia exposures. RESULTS: At baseline, 254 (6%) people reported never having anesthesia; 248 (6%) had had one or more high-risk surgeries with general anesthesia, 3,363 (84%) had had one or more other surgeries with general anesthesia, and 123 (3%) had had one or more surgeries with neuraxial anesthesia. High-risk surgery with general anesthesia was not associated with greater risk of dementia (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.58-1.28) or AD (HR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.61-1.49) than no history of anesthesia. People with any history of other surgery with general anesthesia had a lower risk of dementia (HR = 0.63, 95% CI = 0.46-0.85) and AD (HR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.46-0.93) than people with no history of anesthesia. There was no association between recent anesthesia exposure and dementia or AD. CONCLUSION: Anesthesia exposure was not associated with of dementia or AD in older adults.

Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Mammographic Density and Implications for Breast Density Reporting Legislation.

USA states have begun legislating mammographic breast density reporting to women, requiring that women undergoing screening mammography who have dense breast tissue (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] density c or d) receive written notification of their breast density; however, the impact that misclassification of breast density will have on this reporting remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess reproducibility of the four-category BI-RADS density measure and examine its relationship with a continuous measure of percent density. We enrolled 19 radiologists, experienced in breast imaging, from a single integrated health care system. Radiologists interpreted 341 screening mammograms at two points in time 6 months apart. We assessed intra- and interobserver agreement in radiologists'; interpretations of BI-RADS density and explored whether agreement depended upon radiologist characteristics. We examined the relationship between BI-RADS density and percent density in a subset of 282 examinations. Intraradiologist agreement was moderate to substantial, with kappa varying across radiologists from 0.50 to 0.81 (mean = 0.69, 95% CI [0.63, 0.73]). Intraradiologist agreement was higher for radiologists with ≥10 years experience interpreting mammograms (difference in mean kappa = 0.10, 95% CI [0.01, 0.24]). Interradiologist agreement varied widely across radiologist pairs from slight to substantial, with kappa ranging from 0.02 to 0.72 (mean = 0.46, 95% CI [0.36, 0.55]). Of 145 examinations interpreted as "nondense" (BI-RADS density a or b) by the majority of radiologists, 82.8% were interpreted as "dense" (BI-RADS density c or d) by at least one radiologist. Of 187 examinations interpreted as "dense" by the majority of radiologists, 47.1% were interpreted as "nondense" by at least one radiologist. While the examinations of almost half of the women in our study were interpreted clinically as having BI-RADS density c or d, only about 10% of examinations had percent density >50%. Our results suggest that breast density reporting based on a single BI-RADS density interpretation may be misleading due to high interradiologist variability and a lack of correspondence between BI-RADS density and percent density.