RESUMO
Significant underutilization of breast cancer chemoprevention remains, despite guidelines stating that physicians should recommend chemoprevention with antiestrogen therapy to high-risk women. We randomized women, ages 35 to 75 years, who met high-risk criteria for breast cancer, without a personal history of breast cancer or prior chemoprevention use, to standard educational materials alone or combined with a web-based decision aid. All healthcare providers, including primary care providers and breast specialists, were given access to a web-based decision support tool. The primary endpoint was chemoprevention uptake at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included decision antecedents (perceived breast cancer risk/worry, chemoprevention knowledge, self-efficacy) and decision quality (decision conflict, chemoprevention informed choice) based upon patient surveys administered at baseline, 1 and 6 months after randomization. Among 282 evaluable high-risk women enrolled from November 2016 to March 2020, mean age was 57 years (SD, 9.9) and mean 5-year invasive breast cancer risk was 2.98% (SD, 1.42). There was no significant difference in chemoprevention uptake at 6 months between the intervention and control groups (2.1% vs. 3.5%). Comparing the intervention and control arms at 1 month, there were significant differences among high-risk women in accurate breast cancer risk perceptions (56% vs. 39%, P = 0.017), adequate chemoprevention knowledge (49% vs. 27%, P < 0.001), mean decision conflict (34.0 vs. 47.0, P < 0.001), and informed choice (41% vs. 23%, P = 0.003). These differences were no longer significant at 6 months. Although our decision support tools did not result in a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, we did observe improvements in decision antecedents and decision quality measures. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: In this randomized controlled trial of decision support for 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers, we did not observe a significant increase in chemoprevention uptake, which remained low at under 5%. However, these decision support tools may increase knowledge and informed choice about breast cancer chemoprevention.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Adulto , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Quimioprevenção , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Moduladores de Receptor Estrogênico , Feminino , Humanos , Internet , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeRESUMO
We evaluated strategies to identify and recruit a racially/ethnically diverse cohort of women at high-risk for breast cancer to a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We enrolled 300 high-risk women and 50 healthcare providers to a RCT of standard educational materials alone or in combination with web-based decision support tools. We implemented five strategies to identify high-risk women: (i) recruitment among patients previously enrolled in a study evaluating breast cancer risk; (ii) automated breast cancer risk calculation using information extracted from the electronic health record (EHR); (iii) identification of women with atypical hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) using International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9/10 diagnostic codes; (iv) clinical encounters with enrolled healthcare providers; (v) recruitment flyers/online resources. Breast cancer risk was calculated using either the Gail or Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) models. We identified 6,229 high-risk women and contacted 3,459 (56%), of whom 17.2% were identified from prior study cohort, 37.5% through EHR risk information, 14.8% with atypical hyperplasia/LCIS, 29.0% by clinical encounters, and 1.5% through recruitment flyers. Women from the different recruitment sources varied by age and 5-year invasive breast cancer risk. Of 300 enrolled high-risk women, 44.7% came from clinical encounters and 27.3% from prior study cohort. Comparing enrolled with not-enrolled participants, there were significant differences in mean age (57.2 vs. 59.1 years), proportion of non-Whites (41.5% vs. 54.8%), and mean 5-year breast cancer risk (3.0% vs. 2.3%). We identified and successfully recruited diverse high-risk women from multiple sources. These strategies may be implemented in future breast cancer chemoprevention trials. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: We describe five strategies to identify and successfully recruit a large cohort of racially/ethnically diverse high-risk women from multiple sources to a randomized controlled trial evaluating interventions to increase chemoprevention uptake. Findings could inform recruitment efforts for future breast cancer prevention trials to increase recruitment yield of high-risk women.
Assuntos
Carcinoma de Mama in situ , Neoplasias da Mama , Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/epidemiologia , Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Pré-Escolar , Feminino , Humanos , Hiperplasia , InternetRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Chemoprevention using selective estrogen receptor modulators and aromatase inhibitors has been shown to reduce invasive breast cancer incidence in high-risk women. Despite this evidence, few high-risk women who are eligible for chemoprevention utilize it as a risk-reducing strategy. Reasons for low uptake include inadequate knowledge about chemoprevention among patients and healthcare providers, concerns about side effects, time constraints during the clinical encounter, and competing comorbidities. METHODS/DESIGN: We describe the study design of a randomized controlled trial examining the effect of two web-based decision support tools on chemoprevention decision antecedents and quality, referral for specialized counseling, and chemoprevention uptake among women at an increased risk for breast cancer. The trial is being conducted at a large, urban medical center. A total of 300 patients and 50 healthcare providers will be recruited and randomized to standard educational materials alone or in combination with the decision support tools. Patient reported outcomes will be assessed at baseline, one and six months after randomization, and after their clinic visit with their healthcare provider. DISCUSSION: We are conducting this trial to provide evidence on how best to support personalized breast cancer risk assessment and informed and shared decision-making for chemoprevention. We propose to integrate the decision support tools into clinical workflow, which can potentially expand quality decision-making and chemoprevention uptake. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03069742.
RESUMO
Genetic counseling is under-utilized in women who meet family history criteria for BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) testing, particularly among racial/ethnic minorities. We evaluated the uptake of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among women presenting for screening mammography in a predominantly Hispanic, low-income population of Washington Heights in New York City. We administered the Six-Point Scale (SPS) to women presenting for screening mammography at Columbia University Irving Medical Center (CUIMC) in the Washington Heights neighborhood of New York, NY. The SPS is a family history screener to determine eligibility for BRCA1/2 genetic testing based upon U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines that has been validated in low-income, multiethnic populations. Among women who underwent screening mammography at CUIMC between November 2014 and June 2016, 3,055 completed the SPS family history screener. Participants were predominantly Hispanic (76.7%), and 12% met family history criteria for BRCA1/2 testing, of whom <5% had previously undergone testing. In a multiethnic population, a significant proportion met family history criteria for BRCA1/2 testing, but uptake of genetic testing was low. Such underutilization of BRCA1/2 genetic testing among minorities further underscores the need to develop programs to engage high-risk women from underrepresented populations in genetic testing services.
Assuntos
Proteína BRCA1/genética , Proteína BRCA2/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Aconselhamento Genético/estatística & dados numéricos , Testes Genéticos/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Hispânico ou Latino/genética , Hispânico ou Latino/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Mamografia , Grupos Minoritários/estatística & dados numéricos , Cidade de Nova IorqueRESUMO
BACKGROUND: BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations confer a substantial breast risk of developing breast cancer to those who carry them. For this reason, the United States Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended that all women be screened in the primary care setting for a family history indicative of a mutation, and women with strong family histories of breast or ovarian cancer be referred to genetic counseling. However, few high-risk women are being routinely screened and fewer are referred to genetic counseling. To address this need we have developed two decision support tools that are integrated into clinical care. METHOD: This study is a cluster randomized controlled trial of high-risk patients and their health care providers. Patient-provider dyads will be randomized to receive either standard education that is supplemented with the patient-facing decision aid, RealRisks, and the provider-facing Breast Cancer Risk Navigation Toolbox (BNAV) or standard education alone. We will assess these tools' effectiveness in promoting genetic counseling uptake and informed and shared decision making about genetic testing. DISCUSSION: If found to be effective, these tools can help integrate genomic risk assessment into primary care and, ultimately, help expand access to risk-appropriate breast cancer prevention options to a broader population of high-risk women. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is retrospectively registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03470402 : 20 March 2018.
Assuntos
Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Genes BRCA1 , Genes BRCA2 , Aconselhamento Genético , Internet , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Protocolos Clínicos , Tomada de Decisões , Feminino , Testes Genéticos , Humanos , Mutação , Neoplasias Ovarianas/genética , Projetos de Pesquisa , Medição de RiscoRESUMO
Minority recruitment to cancer trials is low and there are limited data on minority adherence to lifestyle modification interventions. We examined factors related to recruitment and adherence to a pilot weight loss intervention among Hispanic and black breast cancer survivors. Participants completed a detailed screening interview to assess barriers to enrollment. An index was created to assess adherence at 6 months. 112 potentially eligible women were identified; 66 consented and completed a screening interview. After screening, 9 were ineligible; 15 opted to not enroll; and 42 were randomized. Among eligible women, earlier stage at diagnosis, treatment type, and negative beliefs related to exercise and diet after diagnosis were negatively associated with study enrollment (P < 0.05). Self-reported barriers to adherence included fatigue, family responsibilities, illness, work, transportation, and negative perceptions of exercise and diet. Results from this study emphasize the need to adapt recruitment and adherence strategies to address these factors.
Assuntos
Negro ou Afro-Americano/psicologia , Neoplasias da Mama/psicologia , Sobreviventes de Câncer/psicologia , Hispânico ou Latino/psicologia , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/psicologia , Programas de Redução de Peso/métodos , Adulto , Idoso , Neoplasias da Mama/patologia , Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Dieta , Exercício Físico , Feminino , Comportamentos Relacionados com a Saúde , Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Saúde Mental/etnologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Cooperação do Paciente , Seleção de Pacientes , Percepção , Projetos Piloto , Qualidade de Vida , Autoeficácia , Apoio Social , Sociobiologia , Adulto JovemRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The quality of the bowel preparation directly influences colonoscopy effectiveness. Quality indicators are widely employed to monitor operator performance and to gauge colonoscopy effectiveness. Some have suggested that the enumeration of the mean number of adenomas per colonoscopy (MNA) may be a more useful measure of bowel preparation quality, but evidence of the utility of this metric is limited. The relationship between bowel preparation quality and MNA was assessed. METHODS: Records of adult patients, aged 50-74 years, who had undergone a screening colonoscopy in a 6 month period at a hospital-based endoscopy suite in New York City were examined. Excluded were those who were symptomatic or having a colonoscopy for surveillance. Patient and procedural characteristics and clinical findings were abstracted from the endoscopy database. Bowel preparation quality was recorded as excellent, good, fair and poor. Histology and size of polyps removed were gathered from pathology reports. MNA was calculated and incident rate ratios assessing the relationship between bowel preparation quality, MNA, and covariates was calculated using Poisson regression. RESULTS: A total of 2422 colonoscopies were identified; 815 (33.6%) were screening colonoscopies among average risk individuals, 50-74 years; 203 (24.9%) had ≥1 adenomas; and 666 (81.7%) had excellent/good preparation quality. Overall MNA was 0.34 [standard deviation (SD) 0.68] and MNA was greater among those >60 years [incident rate ratio (IRR) 1.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48-2.42), males (IRR 1.60, 95%CI 1.26-2.04) and those with good bowel preparation (IRR 2.54, 95%CI 1.04-6.16). Among those with ≥1 adenomas, MNA was 1.48 (SD 1.05) for excellent and 1.00 (SD 0.00) for poor quality preparation (p = 0.55). CONCLUSIONS: We found that MNA is sensitive to changes in bowel preparation with higher MNA among those with good bowel preparation compared with those with poor preparation. Our evidence suggests MNA was particularly sensitive when restricted to only those in whom adenomas were seen.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Obesity is associated with poorer breast cancer outcomes and losing weight postdiagnosis may improve survival. As Hispanic and black women have poorer breast cancer prognosis than non-Hispanic whites diagnosed at similar age and stage, and have higher rates of obesity, effective weight loss strategies are needed. We piloted a randomized, waitlist-controlled, crossover study to examine the effects and feasibility of the commercial Curves weight loss program among Hispanic, African American and Afro-Caribbean breast cancer survivors. DESIGN AND METHODS: Women with stage 0-IIIa breast cancer ≥ 6 months posttreatment, sedentary, and BMI ≥ 25 kg/m(2) were randomized to the immediate arm (IA): 6 months of the Curves program followed by 6 months of observation; or the waitlist control arm (WCA): 6 months of observation followed by 6 months of the Curves program. The Curves program uses a 30-min exercise circuit and a high-vegetable/low-fat/calorie-restricted diet. RESULTS: A total of 42 women enrolled (79% Hispanic, 21% black), mean age 51 (range 32-69) and mean BMI 33.2(± 5.9) kg/m(2); 91% were retained at month 12. At month 6, women in the IA lost an average 3.3% (± 3.5%) of body weight (range: 1.7% gain to 10.6% loss), as compared with 1.8% (± 2.9%) weight loss in the WCA (P = 0.04). At month 12, on average women in the IA regained some but not all of the weight lost during the first 6 months (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Minority breast cancer survivors were recruited and retained in a weight loss study. Six months of the Curves program resulted in moderate weight loss, but weight loss was not maintained postintervention. Future interventions should identify methods to increase uptake and maintenance of weight loss behaviors.