26
|
Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Davis EM, Donahue KE, Doubeni CA, Krist AH, Kubik M, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Owens DK, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Stevermer J, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Colorectal Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:1965-1977. [PMID: 34003218 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.6238] [Citation(s) in RCA: 857] [Impact Index Per Article: 285.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening. OBJECTIVE To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies. POPULATION Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]). EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences. (C recommendation).
Collapse
|
27
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Davis EM, Donahue KE, Doubeni CA, Kubik M, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Stevermer J, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Hypertension in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:1650-1656. [PMID: 33904861 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.4987] [Citation(s) in RCA: 122] [Impact Index Per Article: 40.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Hypertension is a prevalent condition that affects approximately 45% of the adult US population and is the most commonly diagnosed condition at outpatient office visits. Hypertension is a major contributing risk factor for heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. OBJECTIVE To reaffirm its 2015 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for hypertension in adults, the accuracy of office blood pressure measurement for initial screening, and the accuracy of various confirmatory blood pressure measurement methods. POPULATION Adults 18 years or older without known hypertension. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Using a reaffirmation deliberation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for hypertension in adults has substantial net benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for hypertension in adults 18 years or older with office blood pressure measurement. The USPSTF recommends obtaining blood pressure measurements outside of the clinical setting for diagnostic confirmation before starting treatment. (A recommendation).
Collapse
|
28
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Davis EM, Donahue KE, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Owens DK, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Stevermer J, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Vitamin D Deficiency in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:1436-1442. [PMID: 33847711 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.3069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin that performs an important role in calcium homeostasis and bone metabolism and also affects many other cellular regulatory functions outside the skeletal system. Vitamin D requirements may vary by individual; thus, no one serum vitamin D level cutpoint defines deficiency, and no consensus exists regarding the precise serum levels of vitamin D that represent optimal health or sufficiency. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening for vitamin D deficiency, including the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment. POPULATION Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults who have no signs or symptoms of vitamin D deficiency or conditions for which vitamin D treatment is recommended. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes that the overall evidence on the benefits of screening for vitamin D deficiency is lacking. Therefore, the balance of benefits and harms of screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic adults cannot be determined. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic adults. (I statement).
Collapse
|
29
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Davis EM, Donahue KE, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Stevermer J, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Hearing Loss in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:1196-1201. [PMID: 33755083 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.2566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Age-related sensorineural hearing loss is a common health problem among adults. Nearly 16% of US adults 18 years or older report difficulty hearing. The prevalence of perceived hearing loss increases with age. Hearing loss can adversely affect an individual's quality of life and ability to function independently and has been associated with increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, social isolation, and cognitive decline. OBJECTIVE To update its 2012 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening for hearing loss in adults 50 years or older. POPULATION Asymptomatic adults 50 years or older with age-related hearing loss. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Because of a lack of evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for hearing loss in asymptomatic older adults are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for hearing loss in older adults. (I statement).
Collapse
|
30
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Davis EM, Donahue KE, Doubeni CA, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Li L, Ogedegbe G, Owens DK, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Stevermer J, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Lung Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:962-970. [PMID: 33687470 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.1117] [Citation(s) in RCA: 803] [Impact Index Per Article: 267.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. The most important risk factor for lung cancer is smoking. Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment. OBJECTIVE To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the accuracy of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and on the benefits and harms of screening for lung cancer and commissioned a collaborative modeling study to provide information about the optimum age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal screening interval, and the relative benefits and harms of different screening strategies compared with modified versions of multivariate risk prediction models. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT has a moderate net benefit in persons at high risk of lung cancer based on age, total cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke, and years since quitting smoking. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. (B recommendation) This recommendation replaces the 2013 USPSTF statement that recommended annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.
Collapse
|
31
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:476-481. [PMID: 33528542 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.26988] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 17.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Carotid artery stenosis is atherosclerotic disease that affects extracranial carotid arteries. Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis refers to stenosis in persons without a history of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, or other neurologic symptoms referable to the carotid arteries. The prevalence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis is low in the general population but increases with age. OBJECTIVE To determine if its 2014 recommendation should be reaffirmed, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence review. The reaffirmation update focused on the targeted key questions on the potential benefits and harms of screening and interventions, including revascularization procedures designed to improve carotid artery blood flow, in persons with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults without a history of transient ischemic attack, stroke, or other neurologic signs or symptoms referable to the carotid arteries. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF found no new substantial evidence that could change its recommendation and therefore concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis outweigh the benefits. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends against screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in the general adult population. (D recommendation).
Collapse
|
32
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Interventions for Tobacco Smoking Cessation in Adults, Including Pregnant Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2021; 325:265-279. [PMID: 33464343 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.25019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 243] [Impact Index Per Article: 81.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the US. In 2014, it was estimated that 480 000 deaths annually are attributed to cigarette smoking, including second hand smoke exposure. Smoking during pregnancy can increase the risk of numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes (eg, miscarriage and congenital anomalies) and complications in the offspring (including sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood). In 2019, an estimated 50.6 million US adults (20.8% of the adult population) used tobacco; 14.0% of the US adult population currently smoked cigarettes and 4.5% of the adult population used electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Among pregnant US women who gave birth in 2016, 7.2% reported smoking cigarettes while pregnant. OBJECTIVE To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review to evaluate the benefits and harms of primary care interventions on tobacco use cessation in adults, including pregnant persons. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older, including pregnant persons. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions and US Food and Drug Associated (FDA)-approved pharmacotherapy for tobacco smoking cessation, alone or combined, in nonpregnant adults who smoke is substantial. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions for tobacco smoking cessation on perinatal outcomes and smoking cessation in pregnant persons is substantial. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in pregnant persons is insufficient because few studies are available, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco smoking cessation in adults, including pregnant persons, is insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF has identified the lack of well-designed, randomized clinical trials on e-cigarettes that report smoking abstinence or adverse events as a critical gap in the evidence. RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions and FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for cessation to nonpregnant adults who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all pregnant persons about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions for cessation to pregnant persons who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant persons. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of e-cigarettes for tobacco cessation in adults, including pregnant persons. The USPSTF recommends that clinicians direct patients who use tobacco to other tobacco cessation interventions with proven effectiveness and established safety. (I statement).
Collapse
|
33
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Owens DK, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 324:2415-2422. [PMID: 33320230 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.22980] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE An estimated 862 000 persons in the US are living with chronic infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Persons born in regions with a prevalence of HBV infection of 2% or greater, such as countries in Africa and Asia, the Pacific Islands, and parts of South America, often become infected at birth and account for up to 95% of newly reported chronic infections in the US. Other high-prevalence populations include persons who inject drugs; men who have sex with men; persons with HIV infection; and sex partners, needle-sharing contacts, and household contacts of persons with chronic HBV infection. Up to 60% of HBV-infected persons are unaware of their infection, and many remain asymptomatic until onset of cirrhosis or end-stage liver disease. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of new randomized clinical trials and cohort studies published from 2014 to August 2019 that evaluated the benefits and harms of screening and antiviral therapy for preventing intermediate outcomes or health outcomes and the association between improvements in intermediate outcomes and health outcomes. New key questions focused on the yield of alternative HBV screening strategies and the accuracy of tools to identify persons at increased risk. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to asymptomatic, nonpregnant adolescents and adults at increased risk for HBV infection, including those who were vaccinated before being screened for HBV infection. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for HBV infection in adolescents and adults at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for HBV infection in adolescents and adults at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation).
Collapse
|
34
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld S, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Promote a Healthy Diet and Physical Activity for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Adults With Cardiovascular Risk Factors: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 324:2069-2075. [PMID: 33231670 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.21749] [Citation(s) in RCA: 124] [Impact Index Per Article: 31.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death in the US. Known modifiable risk factors for CVD include smoking, overweight and obesity, diabetes, elevated blood pressure or hypertension, dyslipidemia, lack of physical activity, and unhealthy diet. Adults who adhere to national guidelines for a healthy diet and physical activity have lower cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than those who do not. All persons, regardless of their CVD risk status, benefit from healthy eating behaviors and appropriate physical activity. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on behavioral counseling to promote a healthy diet and physical activity for CVD prevention in adults with cardiovascular risk factors. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older with known hypertension or elevated blood pressure, those with dyslipidemia, or those who have mixed or multiple risk factors such as metabolic syndrome or an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% or greater. Adults with other known modifiable cardiovascular risk factors such as abnormal blood glucose levels, obesity, and smoking are not included in this recommendation. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions have a moderate net benefit on CVD risk in adults at increased risk for CVD. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends offering or referring adults with CVD risk factors to behavioral counseling interventions to promote a healthy diet and physical activity. (B recommendation).
Collapse
|
35
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 324:1878-1883. [PMID: 33170248 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.20122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Prevalence of hypertension (both primary and secondary) in children and adolescents in the US ranges from 3% to 4%. Primary hypertension in children and adolescents occurs primarily in children older than 13 years and has no known cause but is associated with several risk factors, including family history and higher body mass index. Secondary hypertension occurs primarily in younger children and is most commonly caused by genetic disorders, renal disease, endocrine disorders, or cardiovascular abnormalities. OBJECTIVE To update its 2013 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening, test accuracy, the effectiveness and harms of treatment, and the association between hypertension and markers of cardiovascular disease in childhood and adulthood. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to children and adolescents aged 3 to 18 years not known to have hypertension or who are asymptomatic. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes that the evidence to support screening for high blood pressure in children and adolescents is insufficient and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for high blood pressure in children and adolescents. (I statement).
Collapse
|
36
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Prevent Sexually Transmitted Infections: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 324:674-681. [PMID: 32809008 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.13095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Approximately 20 million new cases of bacterial or viral sexually transmitted infections (STIs) occur each year in the US, and about one-half of these cases occur in persons aged 15 to 24 years. Rates of chlamydial, gonococcal, and syphilis infection continue to increase in all regions. Sexually transmitted infections are frequently asymptomatic, which may delay diagnosis and treatment and lead persons to unknowingly transmit STIs to others. Serious consequences of STIs include pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, cancer, and AIDS. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions for preventing STI acquisition. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to all sexually active adolescents and to adults at increased risk for STIs. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions reduce the likelihood of acquiring STIs in sexually active adolescents and in adults at increased risk, including for example, those who have a current STI, do not use condoms, or have multiple partners, resulting in a moderate net benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends behavioral counseling for all sexually active adolescents and for adults at increased risk for STIs. (B recommendation).
Collapse
|
37
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Curry SJ, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Unhealthy Drug Use: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:2301-2309. [PMID: 32515821 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.8020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 138] [Impact Index Per Article: 34.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE An estimated 12% of adults 18 years or older and 8% of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years report unhealthy use of prescription or illegal drugs in the US. OBJECTIVE To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned reviews of the evidence on screening by asking questions about drug use and interventions for unhealthy drug use in adults and adolescents. POPULATION This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons, and adolescents aged 12 to 17 years in primary care settings. This statement does not apply to adolescents or adults who have a currently diagnosed drug use disorder or are currently undergoing or have been referred for drug use treatment. This statement applies to settings and populations for which services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT In adults, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening by asking questions about unhealthy drug use has moderate net benefit when services for accurate diagnosis of unhealthy drug use or drug use disorders, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. In adolescents, because of the lack of evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for unhealthy drug use are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening by asking questions about unhealthy drug use in adults 18 years or older. Screening should be implemented when services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. (Screening refers to asking questions about unhealthy drug use, not testing biological specimens.) (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for unhealthy drug use in adolescents. (I statement).
Collapse
|
38
|
Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Primary Care-Based Interventions to Prevent Illicit Drug Use in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:2060-2066. [PMID: 32453374 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.6774] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE In 2017, an estimated 7.9% of persons aged 12 to 17 years reported illicit drug use in the past month, and an estimated 50% of adolescents in the US had used an illicit drug by the time they graduated from high school. Young adults aged 18 to 25 years have a higher rate of current illicit drug use, with an estimated 23.2% currently using illicit drugs. Illicit drug use is associated with many negative health, social, and economic consequences and is a significant contributor to 3 of the leading causes of death among young persons (aged 10-24 years): unintentional injuries including motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the potential benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults. POPULATION This recommendation applies to children (11 years and younger), adolescents (aged 12-17 years), and young adults (aged 18-25 years), including pregnant persons. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Because of limited and inadequate evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of primary care-based interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults are uncertain and that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. More research is needed. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care-based behavioral counseling interventions to prevent illicit drug use, including nonmedical use of prescription drugs, in children, adolescents, and young adults. (I statement).
Collapse
|
39
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Curry SJ, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Primary Care Interventions for Prevention and Cessation of Tobacco Use in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:1590-1598. [PMID: 32343336 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.4679] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death in the US. An estimated annual 480 000 deaths are attributable to tobacco use in adults, including from secondhand smoke. It is estimated that every day about 1600 youth aged 12 to 17 years smoke their first cigarette and that about 5.6 million adolescents alive today will die prematurely from a smoking-related illness. Although conventional cigarette use has gradually declined among children in the US since the late 1990s, tobacco use via electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is quickly rising and is now more common among youth than cigarette smoking. e-Cigarette products usually contain nicotine, which is addictive, raising concerns about e-cigarette use and nicotine addiction in children. Exposure to nicotine during adolescence can harm the developing brain, which may affect brain function and cognition, attention, and mood; thus, minimizing nicotine exposure from any tobacco product in youth is important. OBJECTIVE To update its 2013 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of primary care interventions for tobacco use prevention and cessation in children and adolescents. The current systematic review newly included e-cigarettes as a tobacco product. POPULATION This recommendation applies to school-aged children and adolescents younger than 18 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that primary care-feasible behavioral interventions, including education or brief counseling, to prevent tobacco use in school-aged children and adolescents have a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that there is insufficient evidence to determine the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions for tobacco cessation among school-aged children and adolescents who already smoke, because of a lack of adequately powered studies on behavioral counseling interventions and a lack of studies on medications. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians provide interventions, including education or brief counseling, to prevent initiation of tobacco use among school-aged children and adolescents. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care-feasible interventions for the cessation of tobacco use among school-aged children and adolescents. (I statement).
Collapse
|
40
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Bacterial Vaginosis in Pregnant Persons to Prevent Preterm Delivery: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:1286-1292. [PMID: 32259236 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.2684] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Bacterial vaginosis is common and is caused by a disruption of the microbiological environment in the lower genital tract. In the US, reported prevalence of bacterial vaginosis among pregnant women ranges from 5.8% to 19.3% and is higher in some races/ethnicities. Bacterial vaginosis during pregnancy has been associated with adverse obstetrical outcomes including preterm delivery, early miscarriage, postpartum endometritis, and low birth weight. OBJECTIVE To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the accuracy of screening and the benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of bacterial vaginosis in asymptomatic pregnant persons to prevent preterm delivery. POPULATION This recommendation applies to pregnant persons without symptoms of bacterial vaginosis. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons not at increased risk for preterm delivery has no net benefit in preventing preterm delivery. The USPSTF concludes that for pregnant persons at increased risk for preterm delivery, the evidence is conflicting and insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends against screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons not at increased risk for preterm delivery. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for bacterial vaginosis in pregnant persons at increased risk for preterm delivery. (I statement).
Collapse
|
41
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Donahue K, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Ogedegbe G, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:970-975. [PMID: 32119076 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.1123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 185] [Impact Index Per Article: 46.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is the most common chronic blood-borne pathogen in the US and a leading cause of complications from chronic liver disease. HCV is associated with more deaths than the top 60 other reportable infectious diseases combined, including HIV. Cases of acute HCV infection have increased approximately 3.8-fold over the last decade because of increasing injection drug use and improved surveillance. OBJECTIVE To update its 2013 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for HCV infection in adolescents and adults. POPULATION This recommendation applies to all asymptomatic adults aged 18 to 79 years without known liver disease. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for HCV infection in adults aged 18 to 79 years has substantial net benefit. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for HCV infection in adults aged 18 to 79 years. (B recommendation).
Collapse
|
42
|
Fitzpatrick AM, Bacharier LB, Jackson DJ, Szefler SJ, Beigelman A, Cabana M, Covar R, Guilbert T, Holguin F, Lemanske RF, Martinez FD, Morgan W, Phipatanakul W, Pongracic JA, Raissy HH, Zeiger RS, Mauger DT. Heterogeneity of Mild to Moderate Persistent Asthma in Children: Confirmation by Latent Class Analysis and Association with 1-Year Outcomes. THE JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-IN PRACTICE 2020; 8:2617-2627.e4. [PMID: 32156610 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.02.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/13/2020] [Accepted: 02/17/2020] [Indexed: 01/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Compared with adults, phenotypic characterization of children with asthma is still limited and it remains difficult to predict which children with asthma are at highest risk for poor outcomes. OBJECTIVE To identify latent classes in a large population of treatment-adherent children with mild to moderate asthma enrolled in clinical trials and determine whether latent class assignment predicts future lung function abnormalities and exacerbation rate. METHODS Latent class analysis was performed on 2593 children with mild to moderate asthma aged 5 18 years, with 19 variables encompassing demographic characteristics, medical history, symptoms, lung function, allergic sensitization, and type 2 inflammation. Outcomes included lung function and the annualized exacerbation rate at 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS Five latent classes were identified with differing demographic features, asthma control, sensitization, type 2 inflammatory markers, and lung function. Exacerbation rates were 1.30 ± 0.12 for class 1 (multiple sensitization with partially reversible airflow limitation), 0.90 ± 0.05 for class 2 (multiple sensitization with reversible airflow limitation), 0.87 ± 0.08 for class 3 (lesser sensitization with reversible airflow limitation), 0.87 ± 0.05 for class 4 (multiple sensitization with normal lung function), and 0.71 ± 0.06 for class 5 (lesser sensitization with normal lung function). Lung function abnormalities persisted in class 1 at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS Children with mild to moderate asthma are a heterogeneous group. Allergic sensitization and lung function may be particularly useful in identifying children at the greatest risk for future exacerbation. Additional studies are needed to determine whether latent classes correspond to meaningful phenotypes for the purpose of personalized treatment.
Collapse
|
43
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2020; 323:757-763. [PMID: 32096858 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2020.0435] [Citation(s) in RCA: 178] [Impact Index Per Article: 44.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Dementia (also known as major neurocognitive disorder) is defined by a significant decline in 1 or more cognitive domains that interferes with a person's independence in daily activities. Dementia affects an estimated 2.4 to 5.5 million individuals in the United States, and its prevalence increases with age. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for cognitive impairment, including mild cognitive impairment and mild to moderate dementia, in community-dwelling adults, including those 65 years or older residing in independent living facilities. POPULATION This recommendation applies to community-dwelling older adults 65 years or older, without recognized signs or symptoms of cognitive impairment. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms of screening for cognitive impairment cannot be determined. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for cognitive impairment in older adults. (I statement).
Collapse
|
44
|
Holguin F, Cardet JC, Chung KF, Diver S, Ferreira DS, Fitzpatrick A, Gaga M, Kellermeyer L, Khurana S, Knight S, McDonald VM, Morgan RL, Ortega VE, Rigau D, Subbarao P, Tonia T, Adcock IM, Bleecker ER, Brightling C, Boulet LP, Cabana M, Castro M, Chanez P, Custovic A, Djukanovic R, Frey U, Frankemölle B, Gibson P, Hamerlijnck D, Jarjour N, Konno S, Shen H, Vitary C, Bush A. Management of severe asthma: a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guideline. Eur Respir J 2020; 55:13993003.00588-2019. [PMID: 31558662 DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00588-2019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 340] [Impact Index Per Article: 85.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2019] [Accepted: 08/08/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
This document provides clinical recommendations for the management of severe asthma. Comprehensive evidence syntheses, including meta-analyses, were performed to summarise all available evidence relevant to the European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society Task Force's questions. The evidence was appraised using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach and the results were summarised in evidence profiles. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by a multidisciplinary Task Force of asthma experts, who made specific recommendations on six specific questions. After considering the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, quality of evidence, feasibility, and acceptability of various interventions, the Task Force made the following recommendations: 1) suggest using anti-interleukin (IL)-5 and anti-IL-5 receptor α for severe uncontrolled adult eosinophilic asthma phenotypes; 2) suggest using a blood eosinophil cut-point ≥150 μL-1 to guide anti-IL-5 initiation in adult patients with severe asthma; 3) suggest considering specific eosinophil (≥260 μL-1) and exhaled nitric oxide fraction (≥19.5 ppb) cut-offs to identify adolescents or adults with the greatest likelihood of response to anti-IgE therapy; 4) suggest using inhaled tiotropium for adolescents and adults with severe uncontrolled asthma despite Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) step 4-5 or National Asthma Education and Prevention Program (NAEPP) step 5 therapies; 5) suggest a trial of chronic macrolide therapy to reduce asthma exacerbations in persistently symptomatic or uncontrolled patients on GINA step 5 or NAEPP step 5 therapies, irrespective of asthma phenotype; and 6) suggest using anti-IL-4/13 for adult patients with severe eosinophilic asthma and for those with severe corticosteroid-dependent asthma regardless of blood eosinophil levels. These recommendations should be reconsidered as new evidence becomes available.
Collapse
|
45
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:2211-2218. [PMID: 31821437 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.18928] [Citation(s) in RCA: 177] [Impact Index Per Article: 35.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is typically defined as aortic enlargement with a diameter of 3.0 cm or larger. The prevalence of AAA has declined over the past 2 decades among screened men 65 years or older in various European countries. The current prevalence of AAA in the United States is unclear because of the low uptake of screening. Most AAAs are asymptomatic until they rupture. Although the risk for rupture varies greatly by aneurysm size, the associated risk for death with rupture is as high as 81%. OBJECTIVE To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the effectiveness of 1-time and repeated screening for AAA, the associated harms of screening, and the benefits and harms of available treatments for small AAAs (3.0-5.4 cm in diameter) identified through screening. POPULATION This recommendation applies to asymptomatic adults 50 years or older. However, the randomized trial evidence focuses almost entirely on men aged 65 to 75 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Based on a review of the evidence, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for AAA in men aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked is of moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for AAA in men aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked is of small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the net benefit of screening for AAA in women aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked or have a family history of AAA. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of screening for AAA in women aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked and have no family history of AAA outweigh the benefits. RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends 1-time screening for AAA with ultrasonography in men aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for AAA with ultrasonography in men aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked rather than routinely screening all men in this group. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine screening for AAA with ultrasonography in women who have never smoked and have no family history of AAA. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for AAA with ultrasonography in women aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked or have a family history of AAA. (I statement).
Collapse
|
46
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Asymptomatic Bacteriuria in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:1188-1194. [PMID: 31550038 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.13069] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Among the general adult population, women (across all ages) have the highest prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria, although rates increase with age among both men and women. Asymptomatic bacteriuria is present in an estimated 1% to 6% of premenopausal women and an estimated 2% to 10% of pregnant women and is associated with pyelonephritis, one of the most common nonobstetric reasons for hospitalization in pregnant women. Among pregnant persons, pyelonephritis is associated with perinatal complications including septicemia, respiratory distress, low birth weight, and spontaneous preterm birth. OBJECTIVE To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on potential benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in adults, including pregnant persons. POPULATION This recommendation applies to community-dwelling adults 18 years and older and pregnant persons of any age without signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Based on a review of the evidence, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnant persons has moderate net benefit in reducing perinatal complications. There is adequate evidence that pyelonephritis in pregnancy is associated with negative maternal outcomes and that treatment of screen-detected asymptomatic bacteriuria can reduce the incidence of pyelonephritis in pregnant persons. The USPSTF found adequate evidence of harms associated with treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria (including adverse effects of antibiotic treatment and changes in the microbiome) to be at least small in magnitude. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in nonpregnant adults has no net benefit. The known harms associated with treatment include adverse effects of antibiotic use and changes to the microbiome. Based on these known harms, the USPSTF determined the overall harms to be at least small in this group. RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends screening pregnant persons for asymptomatic bacteriuria using urine culture. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria in nonpregnant adults. (D recommendation).
Collapse
|
47
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Medication Use to Reduce Risk of Breast Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:857-867. [PMID: 31479144 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.11885] [Citation(s) in RCA: 109] [Impact Index Per Article: 21.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer among women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death. The median age at diagnosis is 62 years, and an estimated 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer at some point in their lifetime. African American women are more likely to die of breast cancer compared with women of other races. OBJECTIVE To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on medications for risk reduction of primary breast cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF reviewed evidence on the accuracy of risk assessment methods to identify women who could benefit from risk-reducing medications for breast cancer, as well as evidence on the effectiveness, adverse effects, and subgroup variations of these medications. The USPSTF reviewed evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, and diagnostic accuracy studies of risk stratification models in women without preexisting breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. FINDINGS The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk assessment tools can predict the number of cases of breast cancer expected to develop in a population. However, these risk assessment tools perform modestly at best in discriminating between individual women who will or will not develop breast cancer. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk-reducing medications (tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors) provide at least a moderate benefit in reducing risk for invasive estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. The USPSTF found that the benefits of taking tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors to reduce risk for breast cancer are no greater than small in women not at increased risk for the disease. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that tamoxifen and raloxifene and adequate evidence that aromatase inhibitors are associated with small to moderate harms. Overall, the USPSTF determined that the net benefit of taking medications to reduce risk of breast cancer is larger in women who have a greater risk for developing breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer to prescribe risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, to women who are at increased risk for breast cancer and at low risk for adverse medication effects. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the routine use of risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, in women who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. (D recommendation) This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women 35 years and older, including women with previous benign breast lesions on biopsy (such as atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ). This recommendation does not apply to women who have a current or previous diagnosis of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.
Collapse
|
48
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Risk Assessment, Genetic Counseling, and Genetic Testing for BRCA-Related Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:652-665. [PMID: 31429903 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.10987] [Citation(s) in RCA: 261] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Potentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases. OBJECTIVE To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery. FINDINGS For women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).
Collapse
|
49
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Curry SJ, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Pancreatic Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:438-444. [PMID: 31386141 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.10232] [Citation(s) in RCA: 207] [Impact Index Per Article: 41.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Pancreatic cancer is an uncommon cancer with an age-adjusted annual incidence of 12.9 cases per 100 000 person-years. However, the death rate is 11.0 deaths per 100 000 person-years because the prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor. Although its incidence is low, pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Because of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, along with improvements in early detection and treatment of other types of cancer, it is estimated that pancreatic cancer may soon become the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. OBJECTIVE To update the 2004 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for pancreatic cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for pancreatic cancer, the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for pancreatic cancer, and the benefits and harms of treatment of screen-detected or asymptomatic pancreatic cancer. FINDINGS The USPSTF found no evidence that screening for pancreatic cancer or treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer improves disease-specific morbidity or mortality, or all-cause mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults can be bounded as no greater than small. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the harms of screening for pancreatic cancer and treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer can be bounded as at least moderate. The USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that the potential benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults do not outweigh the potential harms. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends against screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).
Collapse
|
50
|
Owens DK, Davidson KW, Krist AH, Barry MJ, Cabana M, Caughey AB, Doubeni CA, Epling JW, Kemper AR, Kubik M, Landefeld CS, Mangione CM, Pbert L, Silverstein M, Simon MA, Tseng CW, Wong JB. Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Pregnant Women: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement. JAMA 2019; 322:349-354. [PMID: 31334800 DOI: 10.1001/jama.2019.9365] [Citation(s) in RCA: 33] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection during pregnancy identifies women whose infants are at risk of perinatal transmission. Data from a nationally representative sample showed a prevalence of maternal HBV infection of 85.8 cases per 100 000 deliveries from 1998 to 2011 (0.09% of live-born singleton deliveries in the United States). Although there are guidelines for universal infant HBV vaccination, rates of maternal HBV infection have increased annually by 5.5% since 1998. Children infected with HBV during infancy or childhood are more likely to develop chronic infection. Chronic HBV infection increases long-term morbidity and mortality by predisposing infected persons to cirrhosis of the liver and liver cancer. OBJECTIVE To update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for HBV infection in pregnant women. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update to identify substantial new evidence sufficient enough to change the prior recommendation. The USPSTF targeted its evidence review on the effectiveness and potential harms of screening and the effectiveness and harms of case management to prevent perinatal transmission. FINDINGS The USPSTF previously found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection. Interventions are effective for preventing perinatal transmission, based on foundational evidence and observational studies of US case management programs. In addition, there is evidence that over time, perinatal transmission has decreased among women and infants enrolled in case management, providing an overall substantial health benefit. Therefore, the USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that there is convincing evidence that screening for HBV infection in pregnant women provides substantial benefit. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for HBV infection in pregnant women at their first prenatal visit. (A recommendation).
Collapse
|