The Impact of Adjusting for Hysterectomy Prevalence on Cervical Cancer Incidence Rates and Trends Among Women Aged 30 Years and Older - United States, 2001-2019.

Hysterectomy protects against cervical cancer when the cervix is removed. However, measures of cervical cancer incidence often fail to exclude women with a hysterectomy from the population at risk denominator, underestimating and distorting disease burden. In this study, we estimated hysterectomy prevalence from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys to remove the women who were not at risk of cervical cancer from the denominator and combined these estimates with the United States Cancer Statistics data. From these data, we calculated age-specific and age-standardized incidence rates for women aged >30 years from 2001-2019, adjusted for hysterectomy prevalence. We calculated the difference between unadjusted and adjusted incidence rates and examined trends by histology, age, race and ethnicity, and geographic region using Joinpoint regression. The hysterectomy-adjusted cervical cancer incidence rate from 2001-2019 was 16.7 per 100,000 women-34.6% higher than the unadjusted rate. After adjustment, incidence rates were higher by approximately 55% among Black women, 56% among those living in the East South Central division, and 90% among women aged 70-79 and >80 years. These findings underscore the importance of adjusting for hysterectomy prevalence to avoid underestimating cervical cancer incidence rates and masking disparities by age, race, and geographic region.

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.

Preventive care use among Hispanic adults with limited comfort speaking English: An analysis of the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data.

Language barriers have been associated with worse access to healthcare and poorer health outcomes. To assess differences in access to care and utilization of healthcare services between Hispanic adults and non-Hispanic white adults (NHW), we used the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2013-2016) to compare Hispanic adults who expressed limited comfort speaking in English (LCE) with Hispanic adults who were comfortable speaking in English (CE) and NHW adults. Hispanic adults with CE were less likely than NHW adults to have a usual source of care, use preventive services, including cervical cancer screening, and healthcare services. However, after adjustment breast and cervical cancer screening exceeded that of NHW adults. Hispanic adults with LCE fared substantially worse than their Hispanic counterparts with CE in having a usual source of care, use of preventive services, breast and colorectal cancer screening, and healthcare services. After adjustment, use of all cancer screening tests were similar. Eliminating disparities for Hispanic adults will require a multi-pronged approach to address access to healthcare and other social determinants of health, including poverty, employment discrimination, and educational inequities. The public health community can help improve health literacy, address barriers to care, and provide appropriate language assistance at point of care using culturally-competent means to promote greater utilization of preventive services, including demand for and delivery of cancer screenings.

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.

Preventive care service use among cancer survivors with serious psychological distress: An analysis of the medical expenditure panel survey data.

Serious psychological distress (SPD) can adversely impact health and quality of life after cancer. The purpose of this study is to examine the association between SPD and the receipt of preventive care services and cancer screening among survivors and adults without a cancer history. A total of 12,564 cancer survivors and 160,023 adults without a cancer history as comparison group were identified from the population-based Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2008-2015). SPD was assessed using the 6-item Kessler Psychological Distress Scale. We examined use of preventive care and cancer screening services in cancer survivors and comparison adults with/without SPD. Multivariable logistic regression models were conducted for each outcome: preventive service (i.e. blood pressure, cholesterol, influenza vaccination, routine and dental check-up) or cancer screening (i.e. mammography, Papanicolau test, colorectal cancer screening) adjusting for demographic, comorbidity, usual source of care covariates. Adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Prevalence of SPD was 9.8% in cancer survivors compared to 4.6% in comparison adults. Survivors with SPD were more frequent utilizers of medical care, reporting 10 or more visits to the doctor's office in the past 12 months (29.3% vs. 14.1% without SPD). Having SPD was associated with lower odds of being up-to-date with preventive service use and cancer screening among age- and gender-eligible individuals. The magnitude of the effect was greater in adults' age ≥65 years. Better coordination of care and patient-physician discussions are likely needed to improve delivery of recommended preventive services for persons with SPD.

Beliefs Associated with Sunscreen use among non-Hispanic white Older Adults.

This study examines beliefs about sunscreen use among non-Hispanic white adults aged 50 years or older using online survey data (n=237). Multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine beliefs associated with sunscreen use, adjusted by age, gender, education, geographic location, and skin cancer risk score. Those who believed sunscreen use would prevent them from getting sunburned (odds ratio [OR]=1.84) and those who believed that their romantic partners thought they should use sunscreen (OR=1.72) were more likely to report sunscreen use. Those who believed sunscreen use would "take too much time" were less likely to report sunscreen use (OR=0.65). These findings can inform future research and messaging efforts, including the evaluation of intervention approaches that highlight the immediate benefits of sunscreen use, address concerns about sunscreen use taking too much time, and tap into the potential influence that older adults may have on the sunscreen use of their romantic partners.

Post-treatment Neurocognition and Psychosocial Care Among Breast Cancer Survivors.

INTRODUCTION: Chemotherapy for breast cancer has been associated with cognitive problems; however, the impact of adjuvant hormone therapy is less clear. No studies have explored provider discussions about cognitive concerns or factors associated with neurocognitive treatment. This study examined cognitive problems, factors associated with having a provider discussion, and receipt of neurocognitive treatment. METHODS: Female breast cancer survivors (N=2,537) from the Sister Study and the Two Sister Study who were at least 1 year post-treatment were surveyed in 2012 about their cancer therapies (confirmed by medical records); cognitive concerns; related provider discussions; and neurocognitive treatment. A total of 2,296 women were included in the current 2014 analysis. Extensive covariate information was also ascertained for predictive multivariate models. RESULTS: The prevalence of self-reported cognitive problems after treatment was 60%. Of those reporting cognitive problems, only 37% had discussed those concerns with a provider and 15% had been treated for cognitive symptoms. The odds of reported cognitive concerns that started during and after treatment were elevated for those who received only hormone therapy and no chemotherapy (OR=1.64, 95% CI=1.15, 2.33); chemotherapy and no hormone therapy (OR=5.63, 95% CI=3.52, 9.00); or both (OR=6.33, 95% CI=4.21, 9.54) compared with those reporting neither treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The high prevalence of cognitive concerns underscores the importance of monitoring breast cancer survivors for potential neurocognitive effects of hormone and chemotherapy, discussions with survivors about those concerns, and treatment referrals. Monitoring changes over time can help to evaluate both psychosocial and neurocognitive care provided for survivors.