Breast cancer diagnosis and treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic in a nationwide, insured population.

PURPOSE: The early months of the COVID-19 pandemic led to reduced cancer screenings and delayed cancer surgeries. We used insurance claims data to understand how breast cancer incidence and treatment after diagnosis changed nationwide over the course of the pandemic. METHODS: Using the Optum Research Database from January 2017 to March 2021, including approximately 19 million US adults with commercial health insurance, we identified new breast cancer diagnoses and first treatment after diagnosis. We compared breast cancer incidence and proportion of newly diagnosed patients receiving pre-operative systemic therapy pre-COVID, in the first 2 months of the COVID pandemic and in the later part of the COVID pandemic. RESULTS: Average monthly breast cancer incidence was 19.3 (95% CI 19.1-19.5) cases per 100,000 women and men pre-COVID, 11.6 (95% CI 10.8-12.4) per 100,000 in April-May 2020, and 19.7 (95% CI 19.3-20.1) per 100,000 in June 2020-February 2021. Use of pre-operative systemic therapy was 12.0% (11.7-12.4) pre-COVID, 37.7% (34.9-40.7) for patients diagnosed March-April 2020, and 14.8% (14.0-15.7) for patients diagnosed May 2020-January 2021. The changes in breast cancer incidence across the pandemic did not vary by demographic factors. Use of pre-operative systemic therapy across the pandemic varied by geographic region, but not by area socioeconomic deprivation or race/ethnicity. CONCLUSION: In this US-insured population, the dramatic changes in breast cancer incidence and the use of pre-operative systemic therapy experienced in the first 2 months of the pandemic did not persist, although a modest change in the initial management of breast cancer continued.

Genetic Counseling Referral Rates in Long-Term Survivors of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Background: Inherited BRCA gene mutations (pathogenic variants) cause 10% of breast cancers. BRCA pathogenic variants predispose carriers to triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC); around 30% of patients with TNBC carry BRCA pathogenic variants. The 2018 NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Breast and Ovarian recommend genetic counseling referrals for patients with TNBC diagnosed at age ≤60 years. This study sought to describe genetic counseling referral patterns among long-term TNBC survivors at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Methods: This single-institution retrospective analysis of female long-term (disease-free for ≥5 years) TNBC survivors sought to determine the rate of genetic counseling referral among patients diagnosed at age ≤60 years between 1992 and 2008. Patients who underwent treatment and surveillance visits at our institution and were followed until 2017 were included. We collected BRCA pathogenic variant status among tested patients. Descriptive statistical methods and a univariate analysis were used to identify patient characteristics associated with genetic counseling referral. Results: We identified 646 female long-term TNBC survivors with a median age at diagnosis of 47 years. Of these, 245 (38%) received a recommendation for a genetic counseling referral. Among those referred, 156 (64%) underwent genetic testing, and 35% of those tested had BRCA pathogenic variants. Interestingly, among those referred, 20% declined genetic testing. The rate of genetic referrals improved over time, from 25% among TNBC survivors whose last surveillance visit was between 2011 and 2013 to 100% among those whose last surveillance visit was between 2014 or later. Younger age and premenopausal status at diagnosis and a family history of breast or ovarian cancer were associated with an increased rate of referral for genetic counseling. Conclusions: Among long-term TNBC survivors, the rate of referral to genetic counseling increased over time, and among those tested, 35% carried a BRCA pathogenic variant. Survivorship care provides an excellent opportunity to refer eligible patients for genetic counseling.

Role of students in global health delivery.

What role do students have in global health activities? On one hand, students have much to offer, including innovative ideas, fresh knowledge and perspective, and inspiring energy. At the same time, students lack technical credentials and may drain resources from host communities. Here, we examine the dynamic, contemporary roles of students in global health activities, including health delivery. We focus on 3 themes that guide engagement: (1) fostering an enabling policy environment (eg, toward greater health equity); (2) understanding and working within the local context and governments' needs; and (3) leading bidirectional partnerships. We next study the implications of short-term exposure and long-term engagement programs. We conclude with 4 recommendations on how to better equip students to engage in the next frontier of global health education and future action.