Up-to-Date Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Test Use in the United States, 2021.

INTRODUCTION: We examined national estimates of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test use and compared them with Healthy People 2030 national targets. Test use in 2021 was compared with prepandemic estimates. METHODS: In 2022, we used 2021 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data to estimate proportions of adults up to date with US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations for breast (women aged 50-74 y), cervical (women aged 21-65 y), and CRC screening (adults aged 50-75 y) across sociodemographic and health care access variables. We compared age-standardized estimates from the 2021 and 2019 NHIS. RESULTS: Percentages of adults up to date in 2021 were 75.7% (95% CI, 74.4%-76.9%), 75.2% (95% CI, 73.9%-76.4%), and 72.2% (95% CI, 71.2%-73.2%) for breast, cervical, and CRC screening, respectively. Estimates were below 50% among those without a wellness check in 3 years (all screening types), among those without a usual source of care or insurance (aged <65 y) (breast and CRC screening), and among those residing in the US for less than 10 years (CRC screening). Percentages of adults who were up to date with breast and cervical cancer screening and colonoscopy were similar in 2019 and 2021. Fecal occult blood/fecal immunochemical test (FOBT/FIT) use was modestly higher in 2021 (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In 2021, approximately 1 in 4 adults of screening age were not up to date with breast, cervical, and CRC screening recommendations, and Healthy People 2030 national targets were not met. Disparities existed across several characteristics, particularly those related to health care access. Breast, cervical, and colonoscopy test use within recommended screening intervals approximated prepandemic levels. FOBT/FIT estimates were modestly higher in 2021.

Variation in hysterectomy prevalence and trends among U.S. States and Territories-Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2012-2020.

PURPOSE: We estimated up-to-date state- and territory-level hysterectomy prevalence and trends, which can help correct the population at risk denominator and calculate more accurate uterine and cervical cancer rates. METHODS: We analyzed self-reported data for a population-based sample of 1,267,013 U.S. women aged ≥ 18 years who participated in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys from 2012 to 2020. Estimates were age-standardized and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics and geography. Trends were assessed by testing for any differences in hysterectomy prevalence across years. RESULTS: Hysterectomy prevalence was highest among women aged 70-79 years (46.7%) and ≥ 80 years (48.8%). Prevalence was also higher among women who were non-Hispanic (NH) Black (21.3%), NH American Indian and Alaska Native (21.1%), and from the South (21.1%). Hysterectomy prevalence declined by 1.9 percentage points from 18.9% in 2012 to 17.0% in 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one in five U.S. women overall and half of U.S. women aged ≥ 70 years reported undergoing a hysterectomy. Our findings reveal large variations in hysterectomy prevalence within and between each of the four census regions and by race and other sociodemographic characteristics, underscoring the importance of adjusting epidemiologic measures of uterine and cervical cancers for hysterectomy status.

Twenty years of collaborative research to enhance community practice for cancer prevention and control.

The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) was established in 2002 to conduct applied research and undertake related activities to translate evidence into practice, with a special focus on the unmet needs of populations at higher risk of getting cancer and dying from it. A network of academic, public health and community partners, CPCRN is a thematic research network of the Prevention Research Centers Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The National Cancer Institute's Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS) has been a consistent collaborator. The CPCRN has fostered research on geographically dispersed populations through cross-institution partnerships across the network. Since its inception, the CPCRN has applied rigorous scientific methods to fill knowledge gaps in the application and implementation of evidence-based interventions, and it has developed a generation of leading investigators in the dissemination and implementation of effective public health practices. This article reflects on how CPCRN addressed national priorities, contributed to CDC's programs, emphasized health equity and impacted science over the past twenty years and potential future directions.

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.

Computable Guidelines and Clinical Decision Support for Cervical Cancer Screening and Management to Improve Outcomes and Health Equity.

Cervical cancer is highly preventable when precancerous lesions are detected early and appropriately managed. However, the complexity of and frequent updates to existing evidence-based clinical guidelines make it challenging for clinicians to stay abreast of the latest recommendations. In addition, limited availability and accessibility to information technology (IT) decision supports make it difficult for groups who are medically underserved to receive screening or receive the appropriate follow-up care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC), is leading a multiyear initiative to develop computer-interpretable ("computable") version of already existing evidence-based guidelines to support clinician awareness and adoption of the most up-to-date cervical cancer screening and management guidelines. DCPC is collaborating with the MITRE Corporation, leading scientists from the National Cancer Institute, and other CDC subject matter experts to translate existing narrative guidelines into computable format and develop clinical decision support tools for integration into health IT systems such as electronic health records with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes and decreasing disparities in cervical cancer outcomes among populations that are medically underserved. This initiative meets the challenges and opportunities highlighted by the President's Cancer Panel and the President's Cancer Moonshot 2.0 to nearly eliminate cervical cancer.

Cancer Screening Test Use-U.S., 2019.

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening to reduce mortality from these cancers, but screening use has been below national targets. The purpose of this study is to examine the proportion of screening-eligible adults who are up to date with these screenings and how screening use compares with Healthy People 2020 targets. METHODS: Data from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey were used to examine the percentages of adults up to date with breast cancer screening among women aged 50‒74 years without previous breast cancer, cervical cancer screening among women aged 21‒65 years without previous cervical cancer or hysterectomy, and colorectal cancer screening among adults aged 50‒75 years without previous colorectal cancer. Estimates are presented by sociodemographic characteristics and healthcare access factors. Analyses were conducted in 2021. RESULTS: Percentages of adults up to date were 76.2% (95% CI= 75.0, 77.5) for breast cancer screening, 76.4% (95% CI= 75.2, 77.6) for cervical cancer screening, and 68.3% (95% CI= 67.3, 69.3) for colorectal cancer screening. Although some population subgroups met breast and colorectal cancer screening targets (81.1% and 70.5%, respectively), many did not, and cervical cancer screening was below the target for all examined subgroups. Lower education and income, nonmetropolitan county of residence (which included rural counties), no usual source of care or health insurance coverage, and Medicaid coverage were associated with lower screening test use. CONCLUSIONS: Estimated use of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening tests based on the 2019 National Health Interview Survey were below national targets. Continued monitoring may allow for examination of screening trends, inform interventions, and track progress in eliminating disparities.

US hysterectomy prevalence by age, race and ethnicity from BRFSS and NHIS: implications for analyses of cervical and uterine cancer rates.

PURPOSE: Previous reports of gynecologic cancer rates have adjusted for hysterectomy prevalence with data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) or the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). We sought to determine if BRFSS and NHIS produce similar estimates of hysterectomy prevalence. METHODS: Using data from BRFSS and NHIS, we calculated hysterectomy prevalence for women aged 20-79 years, stratified by 10-year age groups, survey year (2010, 2018), and race/ethnicity (Hispanic, non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaskan Native, non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic Black, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic all other race groups). RESULTS: BRFSS and NHIS produced similar increasing trends in hysterectomy prevalence by age and directional differences by race and ethnicity. Fewer than 2% of women aged 20-29 years and more than 4 out of 10 women aged 70-79 years reported having had a hysterectomy. CONCLUSION: Our analyses suggest adjustment for hysterectomy prevalence with data from either survey would likely reduce distortion in cervical and uterine cancer rates. BRFSS, a survey which has a larger sample size than NHIS, may better support analyses of hysterectomy estimates for smaller subpopulations.

Higher prevalence of hysterectomy among rural women than urban women: Implications for measures of disparities in uterine and cervical cancers.

PURPOSE: Differences in hysterectomy prevalence by rural or urban residence could distort comparisons of rural-urban cervical and uterine cancer incidence. Using data from a large population-based survey, we sought to understand whether hysterectomy prevalence varies by rural or urban residence and whether the relationship between hysterectomy prevalence and rurality varies by race or ethnicity. METHODS: Our analysis included 197,759 female respondents to the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, aged 20-79 years. We calculated population weighted proportions and 95% confidence intervals for hysterectomy prevalence, stratified by rural-urban residence and 5-year age groups. We also report estimates of hysterectomy prevalence by rural-urban residence for specific race and ethnic groups. FINDINGS: Hysterectomy prevalence increased with age and was more common among rural women than urban women. The largest absolute difference occurred among women aged 45-49 years; 28.6% of rural women (95% CI: 25.1-32.2) and 16.6% of urban women (95% CI: 15.3-17.8) reported a hysterectomy. For hysterectomy prevalence by race and ethnicity, rural estimates were higher than urban estimates for the following groups of women: non-Hispanic Asian, non-Hispanic other race, non-Hispanic Black, and non-Hispanic White. Among Hispanic women and non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native women, rural-urban differences in hysterectomy prevalence were not statistically different at the 95% confidence level. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that variation in hysterectomy prevalence, if not adjusted in the analysis, could produce distorted comparisons in measures of the relationship between rurality and uterine and cervical cancer rates. The magnitude of this confounding bias may vary by race and ethnicity.

Cancer Incidence Projections in the United States Between 2015 and 2050.

INTRODUCTION: The number of adults entering the age groups at greatest risk for being diagnosed with cancer is increasing. Projecting cancer incidence can help the cancer control community plan and evaluate prevention strategies aimed at reducing the growing number of cancer cases. METHODS: We used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program and the US Census Bureau to estimate average, annual, age-standardized cancer incidence rates and case counts (for all sites combined and top 22 invasive cancers) in the US for 2015 and to project cancer rates and counts to 2050. We used age, period, and cohort models to inform projections. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2050, we predict the overall age-standardized incidence rate (proxy for population risk for being diagnosed with cancer) to stabilize in women (1%) and decrease in men (-9%). Cancers with the largest change in risk include a 34% reduction for lung and bronchus and a 32% increase for corpus uterine (32%). Because of the growth and aging of the US population, we predict that the annual number of cancer cases will increase 49%, from 1,534,500 in 2015 to 2,286,300 in 2050, with the largest percentage increase among adults aged ≥75 years. Cancers with the largest projected absolute increase include female breast, colon and rectum, and prostate. DISCUSSION: By 2050, we predict the total number of incident cases to increase by almost 50% as a result of the growth and aging of the US population. A greater emphasis on cancer risk reduction is needed to counter these trends.

Mammography use and breast cancer incidence among older U.S. women.

PURPOSE: The death rate for female breast cancer increases progressively with age, but organizations differ in their mammography screening recommendations for older women. To understand current patterns of screening mammography use and breast cancer diagnoses among older women, we examined recent national data on mammography screening use and breast cancer incidence and stage at diagnosis among women aged ≥ 65 years. METHODS: We examined breast cancer incidence using the 2016 United States Cancer Statistics dataset and analyzed screening mammography use among women aged ≥ 65 years using the 2018 National Health Interview Survey. RESULTS: Women aged 70-74 years had the highest breast cancer incidence rate (458.3 cases per 100,000 women), and women aged ≥ 85 years had the lowest rate (295.2 per 100,000 women). The proportion of cancer diagnosed at distant stage or with unknown stage increased with age. Over half of women aged 80-84 years and 26.0% of women aged ≥ 85 years reported a screening mammogram within the last 2 years. Excellent/very good/good self-reported health status (p = .010) and no dependency in activities of daily living/instrumental activities of daily living (p < .001) were associated with recent mammography screening. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer incidence rates and stage at diagnosis vary by age. Many women aged ≥ 75 years receive screening mammograms. The results of this study point to areas for further investigation to promote optimal mammography screening among older women.

Cancer Screening Test Receipt - United States, 2018.

Screening for breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer (CRC) reduces mortality from these cancers.* However, screening test receipt has been below national targets with disparities observed in certain populations (1,2). National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data from 2018 were analyzed to estimate percentages of adults up to date with U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening recommendations. Screening test receipt remained below national Healthy People 2020 (HP2020) targets, although CRC test receipt neared the target. Disparities were evident, with particularly low test receipt among persons who were uninsured or did not have usual sources of care. Continued monitoring helps assess progress toward targets and could inform efforts to promote screening and reduce barriers for underserved populations.

Incidence of and Trends in the Leading Cancers With Elevated Incidence Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations, 2012-2016.

Cancer incidence varies among American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations, as well as between AI/AN and White populations. This study examined trends for cancers with elevated incidence among AI/AN compared with non-Hispanic White populations and estimated potentially avoidable incident cases among AI/AN populations. Incident cases diagnosed during 2012-2016 were identified from population-based cancer registries and linked with the Indian Health Service patient registration databases to improve racial classification of AI/AN populations. Age-adjusted rates (per 100,000) and trends were calculated for cancers with elevated incidence among AI/AN compared with non-Hispanic White populations (rate ratio of >1.0) according to region. Trends were estimated using joinpoint regression analyses. Expected cancers were estimated by applying age-specific cancer incidence rates among non-Hispanic White populations to population estimates for AI/AN populations. Excess cancer cases among AI/AN populations were defined as observed minus expected cases. Liver, stomach, kidney, lung, colorectal, and female breast cancers had higher incidence rates among AI/AN populations across most regions. Between 2012 and 2016, nearly 5,200 excess cancers were diagnosed among AI/AN populations, with the largest number of excess cancers (1,925) occurring in the Southern Plains region. Culturally informed efforts could reduce cancer disparities associated with these and other cancers among AI/AN populations.

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.

Gastric Cancer Among American Indian and Alaska Native Populations in the United States, 2005-2016.

INTRODUCTION: American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) populations have higher gastric cancer rates than the general US population. This study provides a comprehensive overview of incidence rates among AI/AN persons during 2005-2016 compared with non-Hispanic whites (whites). METHODS: Population-based cancer registry data for 2005-2016 were linked with the Indian Health Service patient registration databases to address racial misclassification. Age-adjusted gastric cancer incidence rates were expressed per 100,000 per year. Incidence and trend analyses were restricted to purchased/referred care delivery area counties in 6 geographic regions, comparing gastric cancer incidence rates for AI/AN vs white populations in the United States. RESULTS: Gastric cancer rates were higher in the AI/AN compared with white populations in nearly every US region. Incidence rates for central/distal portions of the stomach were higher in AI/AN individuals compared with whites. Rates of later stage gastric cancer were higher in AI/AN populations overall and in every region except the Pacific Coast and East. Incidence rates decreased significantly over time in both populations. Declining rates in the AI/AN populations were driven by changes in the Pacific Coast and Northern Plains regions. DISCUSSION: AI/AN populations have a disproportionately high incidence of gastric cancer, especially in Alaska. High incidence in the central/distal portions of the stomach among AI/AN populations likely reflects a high prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection in these populations. These data can be used to develop interventions to reduce risk factors and improve access to health services among AI/AN people at high risk for gastric cancer.

An Expanded Agenda for the Primary Prevention of Breast Cancer: Charting a Course for the Future.

Advances in breast cancer science, early detection, and treatment have resulted in improvements in breast cancer survival but not in breast cancer incidence. After skin cancer, breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosis in the United States. Each year, nearly a quarter million U.S. women receive a breast cancer diagnosis, and the number continues to rise each year with the growth in the population of older women. Although much remains to be understood about breast cancer origins and prevention, action can be taken on the existing scientific knowledge to address the systemic factors that drive breast cancer risk at the population level. The California Breast Cancer Research Program funded a team at Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP) to convene leaders in advocacy, policy, and research related to breast cancer prevention from across the state of California. The objective was the development of a strategic plan to direct collective efforts toward specific and measurable objectives to reduce the incidence of breast cancer. The structured, innovative approach used by BCPP to integrate scientific evidence with community perspectives provides a model for other states to consider, to potentially change the future trajectory of breast cancer incidence in the United States.

The IARC Monographs: Updated Procedures for Modern and Transparent Evidence Synthesis in Cancer Hazard Identification.

The Monographs produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) apply rigorous procedures for the scientific review and evaluation of carcinogenic hazards by independent experts. The Preamble to the IARC Monographs, which outlines these procedures, was updated in 2019, following recommendations of a 2018 expert advisory group. This article presents the key features of the updated Preamble, a major milestone that will enable IARC to take advantage of recent scientific and procedural advances made during the 12 years since the last Preamble amendments. The updated Preamble formalizes important developments already being pioneered in the Monographs program. These developments were taken forward in a clarified and strengthened process for identifying, reviewing, evaluating, and integrating evidence to identify causes of human cancer. The advancements adopted include the strengthening of systematic review methodologies; greater emphasis on mechanistic evidence, based on key characteristics of carcinogens; greater consideration of quality and informativeness in the critical evaluation of epidemiological studies, including their exposure assessment methods; improved harmonization of evaluation criteria for the different evidence streams; and a single-step process of integrating evidence on cancer in humans, cancer in experimental animals, and mechanisms for reaching overall evaluations. In all, the updated Preamble underpins a stronger and more transparent method for the identification of carcinogenic hazards, the essential first step in cancer prevention.