Incidence of Stomach, Liver, and Colorectal Cancers by Geography and Social Vulnerability Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations, 2010-2019.

Social determinants of health and associated systems, policies, and practices are important drivers of health disparities. American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations in the United States have elevated incidence rates of stomach, liver, and colorectal cancers compared with other racial/ethnic groups. In this study, we examined incidence rates of 3 types of gastrointestinal cancer among non-Hispanic AI/AN (NH-AI/AN) and non-Hispanic White (NHW) populations by geographic region and Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) score. Incident cases diagnosed during 2010-2019 were identified from population-based cancer registries linked with the Indian Health Service patient registration databases. Age-adjusted incidence rates (per 100,000 population) for stomach, liver, and colorectal cancers were compared within NH-AI/AN populations and between the NH-AI/AN and NHW populations by SVI score. Rates were higher among NH-AI/AN populations in moderate- and high-SVI-score counties in Alaska, the Southern Plains, and the East than in low-SVI counties. Incidence rates among NH-AI/AN populations were elevated when compared with NHW populations by SVI category. Results indicated that higher social vulnerability may drive elevated cancer incidence among NH-AI/AN populations. Additionally, disparities between NH-AI/AN and NHW populations persist even when accounting for SVI. Exploring social vulnerability can aid in designing more effective interventions to address root causes of cancer disparities among AI/AN populations.

Multilevel Small Area Estimation for County-Level Prevalence of Mammography Use in the United States Using 2018 Data.

Background: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50-74 years. We aim to generate county-level prevalence estimates for mammography use to examine disparities among counties. Materials and Methods: We used data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (n = 111,902 women) and linked them to county-level data from the American Community Survey. We defined two outcomes: mammography within the past 2 years (current); and mammography 5 or more years ago or never (rarely or never). We poststratified the data with U.S. Census estimated county population counts, ran Monte Carlo simulations, and generated county-level estimates. We aggregated estimates to state and national levels. We validated internal consistency between our model-based and BRFSS state estimates using Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients. Results: Nationally, more than three in four women [78.7% (95% confidence interval {CI}: 78.2%-79.2%)] were current with mammography, although with large variations among counties. Also, nationally, about one in nine women [11% (95% CI: 10.8%-11.3%)] rarely or never had a mammogram. County estimates for being current ranged from 60.4% in New Mexico to 86.9% in Hawaii. Rarely or never having a mammogram ranged from 6% in Connecticut to 23.0% in Alaska, and on average, almost one in eight women in all the counties. Internal consistency correlation coefficient tests were ≥0.94. Conclusions: Our analyses identified marked county variations in mammography use across the country among women aged 50-74 years. We generated estimates for all counties, which may be helpful for targeted outreach to increase mammography uptake.

Social Determinants of Cancer Risk Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations: An Evidence Review and Map.

Objectives: To explore current literature on social determinants of health (SDOH) and cancer among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations. Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE®, CINAHL, and PsycINFO databases for articles published during 2000 to 2020, which included terms for SDOH and cancer occurrence in AI/AN populations. We derived the data extraction elements from the PROGRESS-Plus framework. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-Equity extension guided the evidence map. Results: From 2180 screened articles, 297 were included. Most were observational (93.9%), employed a cross-sectional design (83.2%), were categorized as cancer occurrence and surveillance research (62%), and included no cancer-related risk factors (70.7%). Race, gender, and place were the most frequently included PROGRESS-Plus categories. Religion, relationship features, and characteristics of discrimination were least common. Only 12% of articles mentioned historical/current trauma or historical context. Conclusions: Gaps exist in our understanding of SDOH as drivers of cancer disparities in AI/AN populations. Future studies in health equity science may incorporate historical and cultural factors into SDOH frameworks tailored for AI/AN populations.

Risk of clear-cell adenocarcinoma of the vagina and cervix among US women with potential exposure to diethylstilbestrol in utero.

PURPOSE: Women exposed to diethylstilbestrol (DES) in utero were at elevated risk of clear-cell adenocarcinoma of the vagina and cervix (CCA) as young women. Previous research suggested that this elevated risk of CCA may persist into adulthood. We extended a published analysis to measure CCA risk as these women aged. METHODS: Standardized incidence ratios (SIR) compared CCA risk among women born from 1947 through 1971 (the DES-era) to CCA risk among the comparison group of women born prior to 1947, using registry data that covered the US population. RESULTS: Incidence rates of CCA among both cohorts increased with age. Among the DES-era birth cohort, higher rates of CCA were observed across all age groups except 55-59 years. SIR estimates had wide confidence intervals that often included the null value. CONCLUSIONS: Results are consistent with prior research and suggest an elevated risk of CCA in midlife and at older ages among women exposed in utero to DES. These results highlight unresolved issues regarding cancer risk among aging DES daughters and appropriate screening guidance. The examination of population-based cancer surveillance data may be a useful tool for monitoring trends in the incidence of other rare cancers over time among specific birth cohorts.

Prevalence of Americans reporting a family history of cancer indicative of increased cancer risk: Estimates from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey.

The collection and evaluation of family health history in a clinical setting presents an opportunity to discuss cancer risk, tailor cancer screening recommendations, and identify people with an increased risk of carrying a pathogenic variant who may benefit from referral to genetic counseling and testing. National recommendations for breast and colorectal cancer screening indicate that men and women who have a first-degree relative affected with these types of cancers may benefit from talking to a healthcare provider about starting screening at an earlier age and other options for cancer prevention. The prevalence of reporting a first-degree relative who had cancer was assessed among adult respondents of the 2015 National Health Interview Survey who had never had cancer themselves (n = 27,999). We found 35.6% of adults reported having at least one first-degree relative with cancer at any site. Significant differences in reporting a family history of cancer were observed by sex, age, race/ethnicity, educational attainment, and census region. Nearly 5% of women under age 50 and 2.5% of adults under age 50 had at least one first-degree relative with breast cancer or colorectal cancer, respectively. We estimated that 5.8% of women had a family history of breast or ovarian cancer that may indicate increased genetic risk. A third of U.S. adults who have never had cancer report a family history of cancer in a first-degree relative. This finding underscores the importance of using family history to inform discussions about cancer risk and screening options between healthcare providers and their patients.

Multilevel small area estimation for county-level prevalence of colorectal cancer screening test use in the United States using 2018 data.

PURPOSE-: National screening estimates mask county-level variations. We aimed to generate county-level colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence estimates for 2018 among adults aged 50-75 years and identify counties with low screening prevalence. METHODS-: We combined individual-level county data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (n = 204,947) with the 2018 American Community Survey county poverty data as a covariate, and the 2018 U.S. Census county population count data to generate county-level prevalence estimates for being current with any CRC screening test, colonoscopy, and home stool blood test. Because BRFSS is a state-based survey, and because some counties did not have samples for analysis, we used correlation coefficients to test internal consistency between model-based and BRFSS state estimates. RESULTS-: Correlation coefficients tests were ≥0.97. Model-based national prevalence for any test was 69.9% (95% CI, 69.5% -70.4%) suggesting 30% are not current with screening test use. State mean estimates ranged from 62.1% in Alaska and Wyoming to 76.6% in Maine and Massachusetts. County mean estimates ranged from 42.2% in Alaska to 80.0% in Florida and Rhode Island. Most tests were performed with colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS-: Estimates across all U.S. counties showed large variations. Estimates may be informative for planning by states and local screening programs.

Multilevel Small Area Estimation of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Test in the United States by Age Group: 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prostate cancer screening for men aged 55 to 69 years who express a preference for being screened after being informed about and understanding prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test benefits and risks. USPSTF recommended against screening men aged ≥70 years. We aim to generate county-level prevalence estimates, masked by national and state estimates, to identify counties with high PSA screening prevalence. METHODS: We fitted multilevel logistic regression mixed models for 4 age groups (≥40, 40 to 54, 55 to 69, ≥70 years), using data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (n = 116,654) and other sources. We evaluated consistency between our model-based state and BRFSS direct state estimates with Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients. RESULTS: PSA screening prevalence increased with increasing age groups: 7.7% for men aged 40 to 54 years, 27.2% for men aged 55 to 69 years, and 33.7% among men age ≥70 years, and was largely clustered in the South and Appalachia. Many county estimates among men aged ≥70 years exceeded 40%, especially in the South. Correlation coefficients were 0.94 for men aged ≥40, and ≥0.85 for men aged 40 to 54 years, 55 to 69 years, and ≥70 years. CONCLUSIONS: PSA screening was highest among men ≥70 years, for whom it is not recommended, and in the South among all age groups. Screening varied substantially within states. IMPACT: In 2018, on average, more than 1 in 4 men aged 55 to 69 years and 1 in 3 men aged ≥70 years underwent PSA screening in the prior year, suggesting potential overuse among some men.

Breast Cancer-Related Employment Disruption and Financial Hardship in the Sister Study.

Background: More than one-half of breast cancer cases are diagnosed among women aged younger than 62 years, which may result in employment challenges. This study examined whether cancer-related employment disruption was associated with increased financial hardship in a national US study of women with breast cancer. Methods: Women with breast cancer who were enrolled in the Sister or Two Sister Studies completed a survivorship survey in 2012. Employment disruption was defined as stopping work completely or working fewer hours after diagnosis. Financial hardship was defined as: 1) experiencing financial problems paying for cancer care, 2) borrowing money or incurring debt, or 3) filing for bankruptcy because of cancer. Prevalence ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between employment disruption and financial hardship were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression with robust variance. Results: We analyzed data from women employed at diagnosis (n = 1628). Women were a median age of 48 years at diagnosis and 5.6 years from diagnosis at survey completion. Overall, 27.3% of women reported employment disruption (15.4% stopped working; 11.9% reduced hours), and 21.0% experienced financial hardship (16.0% had difficulty paying for care; 12.6% borrowed money or incurred debt; 1.8% filed for bankruptcy). In adjusted analysis, employment disruption was associated with nearly twice the prevalence of financial hardship (prevalence ratio = 1.93, 95% confidence interval = 1.58 to 2.35). Conclusions: Women experiencing employment disruptions after breast cancer may be more vulnerable to financial hardship. Findings highlight the need to target risk factors for employment disruption, facilitate return to work or ongoing employment, and mitigate financial consequences after cancer.

Employment After Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment Among Women in the Sister and the Two Sister Studies.

Purpose Women undergoing diagnosis and treatment for breast cancer may face challenges in employment. We investigated the impact of demographic, clinical, workplace, and psychosocial characteristics on loss of employment after a breast cancer diagnosis and treatment. We further describe changes in work status and work environment for cancer survivors who sustain employment. Methods We analyzed responses from a survey of breast cancer survivors from the Sister Study and the Two Sister Study cohorts who reported being employed at the time of their breast cancer diagnosis and who reported employment status (lost vs. sustained employment) at the time of survey administration. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify the effects of lymphedema, neuropathy, problems with memory or attention, social support, health insurance, and sick leave on lost employment, adjusting for demographic characteristics, cancer stage, treatment, and general health. Results Of the 1675 respondents who reported being employed at the time of diagnosis, 83.5% reported being 'currently' employed at the time of the survey. Older age, peripheral neuropathy, lack of sick leave, late stage at diagnosis, a recurrence or a new cancer, problems with memory or attention, and poor general health were significantly associated with lost employment. Conclusions The long-term effects of breast cancer treatment and workplace provisions for leave and accommodation may have a substantial effect on women's ability to sustain employment. The findings from this study highlight challenges reported by cancer survivors that may inform clinical and occupational interventions to support survivors' return to work.

Geographic Co-Occurrence of Mesothelioma and Ovarian Cancer Incidence.

Background: Asbestos is an established cause of several cancers, including mesothelioma and ovarian cancer. Incidence of mesothelioma, the sentinel asbestos-associated cancer, varies by state, likely reflecting different levels of asbestos exposure. We hypothesized that states with high mesothelioma incidence may also have high ovarian cancer incidence. Materials and Methods: Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Program for Cancer Registries and the National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, we examined the geographic co-occurrence of mesothelioma and ovarian cancer incidence rates by U.S. state for 2003-2015. Results: By state, mesothelioma incidence ranged from 0.5 to 1.3 cases per 100,000 persons and ovarian cancer incidence ranged from 9 to 12 cases per 100,000 females. When states were grouped by quartile of mesothelioma incidence, the average ovarian cancer incidence rate was 10% higher in states with the highest mesothelioma incidence than in states with the lowest mesothelioma incidence. Ovarian cancer incidence tended to be higher in states with high mesothelioma incidence (Pearson correlation r = 0.54; p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Data from state cancer registries show ovarian cancer incidence was positively correlated with mesothelioma incidence, suggesting asbestos may be a common exposure. The potential for asbestos exposure has declined since the 1970s because fewer products contain asbestos; however, some products, materials, and buildings may still release asbestos and thousands of workers may be exposed. Ensuring that people are protected from exposure to asbestos in their workplaces, homes, schools, and communities may reduce the risk of several cancers.

Multilevel Regression for Small-Area Estimation of Mammography Use in the United States, 2014.

BACKGROUND: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50-74 years. County-level information on population measures of mammography use can inform targeted intervention to reduce geographic disparities in mammography use. County-level estimates for mammography use nationwide are rarely presented. METHODS: We used data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS; n = 130,289 women), linked it to the American Community Survey poverty data, and fitted multilevel logistic regression models with two outcomes: mammography within the past 2 years (up-to-date), and most recent mammography 5 or more years ago or never (rarely/never). We poststratified the data with U.S. Census population counts to run Monte Carlo simulations. We generated county-level estimates nationally and by urban-rural county classifications. County-level prevalence estimates were aggregated into state and national estimates. We validated internal consistency between our model-based state-specific estimates and urban-rural estimates with BRFSS direct estimates using Spearman correlation coefficients and mean absolute differences. RESULTS: Correlation coefficients were 0.94 or larger. Mean absolute differences for the two outcomes ranged from 0.79 to 1.03. Although 78.45% (95% confidence interval, 77.95%-78.92%) of women nationally were up-to-date with mammography, more than half of the states had counties with >15% of women rarely/never using a mammogram, many in rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: We provided estimates for all U.S. counties and identified marked variations in mammography use. Many states and counties were far from the 2020 target (81.1%). IMPACT: Our results suggest a need for planning and resource allocation on a local level to increase mammography uptake.

Factors associated with breast MRI use among women with a family history of breast cancer.

Although annual breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is recommended for women at high risk for breast cancer as an adjunct to screening mammography, breast MRI use remains low. We examined factors associated with breast MRI use in a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer but no personal cancer history. Study participants came from the Sister Study cohort, a nationwide, prospective study of women with at least 1 sister who had been diagnosed with breast cancer but who themselves had not ever had breast cancer (n = 17 894). Participants were surveyed on breast cancer beliefs, cancer worry, breast MRI use, provider communication, and genetic counseling and testing. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with having a breast MRI overall and for those at high risk. Breast MRI was reported by 16.1% and was more common among younger women and those with higher incomes. After adjustment for demographics, ever use of breast MRI was associated with actual and perceived risk. Odds ratios (OR) were 12.29 (95% CI, 8.85-17.06), 2.48 (95% CI, 2.27-2.71), and 2.50 (95% CI, 2.09-2.99) for positive BRCA1/2 test, lifetime breast cancer risk ≥ 20%, and being told by a health care provider of higher risk, respectively. Women who believed they had much higher risk than others or had higher level of worry were twice as likely to have had breast MRI; OR = 2.23 (95% CI, 1.82-2.75) and OR = 1.76 (95% CI, 1.52-2.04). Patterns were similar among women at high risk. Breast cancer risk, provider communication, and personal beliefs were determinants of breast MRI use. To support shared decisions about the use of breast MRI, women could benefit from improved understanding of the chances of getting breast cancer and increased quality of provider communications.

Multilevel Small-Area Estimation of Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States.

Background: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends routine screening for colorectal cancer for adults ages 50 to 75 years. We generated small-area estimates for being current with colorectal cancer screening to examine sociogeographic differences among states and counties. To our knowledge, nationwide county-level estimates for colorectal cancer screening are rarely presented.Methods: We used county data from the 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS; n = 251,360 adults), linked it to the American Community Survey poverty data, and fitted multilevel logistic regression models. We post-stratified the data with the U.S. Census population data to run Monte Carlo simulations. We generated county-level screening prevalence estimates nationally and by race/ethnicity, mapped the estimates, and aggregated them into state and national estimates. We evaluated internal consistency of our modeled state-specific estimates with BRFSS direct state estimates using Spearman correlation coefficients.Results: Correlation coefficients were ≥0.95, indicating high internal consistency. We observed substantial variations in current colorectal cancer screening estimates among the states and counties within states. State mean estimates ranged from 58.92% in Wyoming to 75.03% in Massachusetts. County mean estimates ranged from 40.11% in Alaska to 79.76% in Florida. Larger county variations were observed in various race/ethnicity groups.Conclusions: State estimates mask county variations. However, both state and county estimates indicate that the country is far behind the "80% by 2018" target.Impact: County-modeled estimates help identify variation in colorectal cancer screening prevalence in the United States and guide education and enhanced screening efforts in areas of need, including areas without BRFSS direct-estimates. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(3); 245-53. ©2018 AACR.

Communicating with Daughters About Familial Risk of Breast Cancer: Individual, Family, and Provider Influences on Women's Knowledge of Cancer Risk.

INTRODUCTION: Women facing complex and uncertain situations such as cancer in their families may seek information from a variety of sources to gain knowledge about cancer risk and reduce uncertainty. We describe and assess the relative importance of information sources about familial breast cancer at the individual, family, and healthcare provider levels influencing women's reporting they had enough information to speak with daughters about breast cancer. This outcome we refer to as being informed about breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sister Study participants, a cohort of women with a family history of breast cancer, were surveyed on family cancer history, family communication, social support, and interactions with healthcare providers (n = 11,766). Adjusted percentages and 95% confidence intervals for being informed about breast cancer versus not being informed were computed for individual-, family-, and provider-level characteristics in three steps using multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: We found 65% of women reported being informed about breast cancer while 35% did not. Having a trusted person with whom to discuss cancer concerns, having a lower versus higher perceived risk of breast cancer, having undergone genetic counseling, and being satisfied with physician discussions about breast cancer in their families were predictors of being informed about breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Although acquiring objective risk information, such as through genetic counseling, may contribute to a basic level of understanding, communication with providers and within other trusted relationships appears to be an essential component in women's reporting they had all the information they need to talk with their daughters about breast cancer.

Geographic Access to Cancer Care and Mortality Among Adolescents.

PURPOSE: Adolescents with cancer have had less improvement in survival than other populations in the United States. This may be due, in part, to adolescents not receiving treatment at Children's Oncology Group (COG) institutions, which have been shown to increase survival for some cancers. The objective of this ecologic study was to examine geographic distance to COG institutions and adolescent cancer mortality. METHODS: We calculated cancer mortality among adolescents and sociodemographic and healthcare access factors in four geographic zones at selected distances surrounding COG facilities: Zone A (area within 10 miles of any COG institution), Zones B and C (concentric rings with distances from a COG institution of >10-25 miles and >25-50 miles, respectively), and Zone D (area outside of 50 miles). RESULTS: The adolescent cancer death rate was highest in Zone A at 3.21 deaths/100,000, followed by Zone B at 3.05 deaths/100,000, Zone C at 2.94 deaths/100,000, and Zone D at 2.88 deaths/100,000. The United States-wide death rate for whites without Hispanic ethnicity, blacks without Hispanic ethnicity, and persons with Hispanic ethnicity was 2.96 deaths/100,000, 3.10 deaths/100,000, and 3.26 deaths/100,000, respectively. Zone A had high levels of poverty (15%), no health insurance coverage (16%), and no vehicle access (16%). CONCLUSIONS: Geographic access to COG institutions, as measured by distance alone, played no evident role in death rate differences across zones. Among adolescents, socioeconomic factors, such as poverty and health insurance coverage, may have a greater impact on cancer mortality than geographic distance to COG institution.

Characteristics associated with genetic counseling referral and BRCA1/2 testing among women in a large integrated health system.

BACKGROUND: Evidence shows underutilization of cancer genetics services. To explore the reasons behind this underutilization, this study evaluated characteristics of women who were referred for genetic counseling and/or had undergone BRCA1/2 testing. METHODS: An ovarian cancer risk perception study stratified 16,720 eligible women from the Henry Ford Health System into average-, elevated-, and high-risk groups based on family history. We randomly selected 3,307 subjects and interviewed 2,524 of them (76.3% response rate). RESULTS: Among the average-, elevated-, and high-risk groups, 2.3, 10.1, and 20.2%, respectively, reported genetic counseling referrals, and 0.8, 3.3, and 9.5%, respectively, reported having undergone BRCA testing. Personal breast cancer history, high risk, and perceived ovarian cancer risk were associated with both referral and testing. Discussion of family history with a doctor predicted counseling referral, whereas belief that family history influenced risk was the strongest BRCA testing predictor. Women perceiving their cancer risk as much higher than other women their age were twice as likely (95% confidence interval: 2.0-9.6) to report genetic counseling referral. CONCLUSION: In a health system with ready access to cancer genetic counseling and BRCA testing, women who were at high risk underutilized these services. There were strong associations between perceived ovarian cancer risk and genetic counseling referral, and between a belief that family history influenced risk and BRCA testing.

Cognitive and affective influences on perceived risk of ovarian cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Studies suggest that both affective and cognitive processes are involved in the perception of vulnerability to cancer and that affect has an early influence in this assessment of risk. We constructed a path model based on a conceptual framework of heuristic reasoning (affect, resemblance, and availability) coupled with cognitive processes involved in developing personal models of cancer causation. METHODS: From an eligible cohort of 16 700 women in a managed care organization, we randomly selected 2524 women at high, elevated, and average risk of ovarian cancer and administered a questionnaire to test our model (response rate 76.3%). Path analysis delineated the relationships between personal and cognitive characteristics (number of relatives with cancer, age, ideas about cancer causation, perceived resemblance to an affected friend or relative, and ovarian cancer knowledge) and emotional constructs (closeness to an affected relative or friend, time spent processing the cancer experience, and cancer worry) on perceived risk of ovarian cancer. RESULTS: Our final model fit the data well (root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.028, comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.99, normed fit index (NFI) = 0.98). This final model (1) demonstrated the nature and direction of relationships between cognitive characteristics and perceived risk; (2) showed that time spent processing the cancer experience was associated with cancer worry; and (3) showed that cancer worry moderately influenced perceived risk. DISCUSSION: Our results highlight the important role that family cancer experience has on cancer worry and shows how cancer experience translates into personal risk perceptions. This understanding informs the discordance between medical or objective risk assessment and personal risk assessment. Published in 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Cancer screening among a population-based sample of insured women.

PURPOSE: Screening has been shown to lower the morbidity and mortality for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Despite the availability of cancer screening, nearly 70,000 women die each year from these cancers. We conducted a study in 2008 within a privately-insured patient population of women who were members of an integrated health care system in Southeastern Michigan, for whom information on ovarian cancer risk as well as personal and family history of cancer was available. METHODS: We used a population-based, weighted stratified random sample of women from a single health care institution to assess the proportion with up-to-date breast, cervical, and colorectal screening. Multivariable analyses were conducted to identify predictors of screening behavior. RESULTS: In our study, women reported cervical and breast cancer screening above 90% and colorectal cancer screening above 75%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study hold promise that Healthy People 2020 cancer screening objectives might be obtainable as access to health insurance is expanded among US residents.

Age and cancer risk: a potentially modifiable relationship.

This article challenges the idea that cancer cannot be prevented among older adults by examining different aspects of the relationship between age and cancer. Although the sequential patterns of aging cannot be changed, several age-related factors that contribute to disease risk can be. For most adults, age is coincidentally associated with preventable chronic conditions, avoidable exposures, and modifiable risk behaviors that are causally associated with cancer. Midlife is a period of life when the prevalence of multiple cancer risk factors is high and incidence rates begin to increase for many types of cancer. However, current evidence suggests that for most adults, cancer does not have to be an inevitable consequence of growing older. Interventions that support healthy environments, help people manage chronic conditions, and promote healthy behaviors may help people make a healthier transition from midlife to older age and reduce the likelihood of developing cancer. Because the number of adults reaching older ages is increasing rapidly, the number of new cancer cases will also increase if current incidence rates remain unchanged. Thus, the need to translate the available research into practice to promote cancer prevention, especially for adults at midlife, has never been greater.