Geographic Variation in Overscreening for Colorectal, Cervical, and Breast Cancer Among Older Adults

ChatGPT4 Outperforms Endoscopists for Determination of Postcolonoscopy Rescreening and Surveillance Recommendations

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Large language models including Chat Generative Pretrained Transformers version 4 (ChatGPT4) improve access to artificial intelligence, but their impact on the clinical practice of gastroenterology is undefined. This study compared the accuracy, concordance, and reliability of ChatGPT4 colonoscopy recommendations for colorectal cancer rescreening and surveillance with contemporary guidelines and real-world gastroenterology practice.

METHODS

History of present illness, colonoscopy data, and pathology reports from patients undergoing procedures at 2 large academic centers were entered into ChatGPT4 and it was queried for the next recommended colonoscopy follow-up interval. Using the McNemar test and inter-rater reliability, we compared the recommendations made by ChatGPT4 with the actual surveillance interval provided in the endoscopist's procedure report (gastroenterology practice) and the appropriate US Multisociety Task Force (USMSTF) guidance. The latter was generated for each case by an expert panel using the clinical information and guideline documents as reference.

RESULTS

Text input of de-identified data into ChatGPT4 from 505 consecutive patients undergoing colonoscopy between January 1 and April 30, 2023, elicited a successful follow-up recommendation in 99.2% of the queries. ChatGPT4 recommendations were in closer agreement with the USMSTF Panel (85.7%) than gastroenterology practice recommendations with the USMSTF Panel (75.4%) (P < .001). Of the 14.3% discordant recommendations between ChatGPT4 and the USMSTF Panel, recommendations were for later screening in 26 (5.1%) and for earlier screening in 44 (8.7%) cases. The inter-rater reliability was good for ChatGPT4 vs USMSTF Panel (Fleiss κ, 0.786; 95% CI, 0.734-0.838; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial real-world results suggest that ChatGPT4 can define routine colonoscopy screening intervals accurately based on verbatim input of clinical data. Large language models have potential for clinical applications, but further training is needed for broad use.

Effect of Messaging on Support for Breast Cancer Screening Cessation Among Older US Women: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Many older women are screened for breast cancer beyond guideline-recommended thresholds. Messaging holds promise to reduce overscreening.

Objective

To investigate the effect of a message on older women's support for and intentions of stopping breast cancer screening.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A 2-wave randomized clinical online survey trial using a nationally representative online panel was performed from May 12 to June 19, 2023. Women 65 years or older without breast cancer were eligible to participate.

Intervention

A pilot-tested breast cancer screening cessation message delivered to a hypothetical older woman with serious illnesses and functional impairment. The message was described as from 1 of 3 sources (clinician, news story, or family member). Participants were randomized into 4 groups: no message (group 1 [control]), a single message from a clinician at wave 1 and no message at wave 2 (group 2), a message from a news story (wave 1) and a clinician (wave 2) (group 3), and a message from a family member (wave 1) and a clinician (wave 2) (group 4).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Support for stopping screening in the hypothetical older woman (primary) and screening intentions for oneself (secondary) were assessed on 7-point scales, with higher values indicating stronger support for and intentions to stop screening. Means were compared using analysis of variance. The message effect on screening intentions among participants 75 years or older and those with life expectancy of less than 10 years were also explored.

Results

A total of 3051 women participated in wave 1 of the trial. The mean (SD) age was 72.8 (5.9) years; 272 (8.9%) were non-Hispanic Black and 2506 (82.1%) were non-Hispanic White. Of these women, 2796 (91.6%) completed wave 2. Group 2 had significantly higher support for screening cessation in the hypothetical patient at wave 2 (mean score, 3.14 [95% CI, 2.99-3.29]) compared with group 1 (mean score, 2.68 [95% CI, 2.54-2.82]; P < .001). The effect was even stronger in group 3 (mean score, 4.23 [95% CI, 4.09-4.38]) and group 4 (mean score, 4.12 [95% CI, 3.97-4.27]) compared with both groups 1 and 2 (all P < .001). Message effects on self-screening intentions followed a similar pattern, with larger effects among participants 75 years or older or with limited life expectancy.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, a breast cancer screening cessation message significantly increased older women's support for and intentions of screening cessation. The strongest effects were observed when the message was delivered over time from multiple sources. Future work needs to engage potential message sources to examine the feasibility and acceptability of multilevel messaging strategies and their effect on screening behavior.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05821023.

Impact of population ageing on cancer-related disability-adjusted life years: A global decomposition analysis

Background

As the global population ages, the burden of cancer is increasing. We aimed to assess the impact of population ageing on cancer-related disability-adjusted life years (DALYs).

Methods

We used the decomposition method to estimate the impact of ageing, population growth, and epidemiological change on cancer-related DALYs from 1990 to 2019, stratified by 204 countries/territories and by their sociodemographic index (SDI). This approach separates the net effect of population ageing from population growth and change in age-specific DALY rates.

Results

Cancer-related DALYs among individuals aged ≥65 years increased by 95.14% between 1990 (52.25 million) and 2019 (101.96 million). Population growth was the main contributor to cancer-related DALYs (92.38 million, attributed proportion: 60.91%), followed by population ageing (41.38 million, 27.28%). Cancer-related DALYs attributed to population ageing followed a bell-shaped pattern when stratified by SDI, meaning they peaked in middle-SDI countries. Cancer-related DALYs attributed to ageing increased in 171 and decreased in 33 countries/territories. The top three cancer types with the highest increase in the absolute number of cancer-related DALYs associated with ageing were tracheal, bronchus, and lung (8.72 million); stomach (5.06 million); and colorectal (4.28 million) cancers, while the attributed proportion of DALYs was the highest in prostate (44.75%), pancreatic (40.93%), and non-melanoma skin (38.03%) cancers.

Conclusions

Population ageing contributed to global cancer-related DALYs, revealing a bell-shaped pattern when stratified by socioeconomic development, affecting middle-SDI countries the most. To respond to the growing ageing population and reduce cancer-related DALYs, it is necessary to allocate health care resources and prioritize interventions for older adults.

Screening Beyond the Evidence: Patterns of Age and Comorbidity for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Little evidence exists to guide continuation of screening beyond the recommended ages of national guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, although increasing age and comorbidity burden is likely to reduce the screening benefit of lower mortality.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize screening after recommended stopping ages, by age and comorbidities in a large, diverse sample.

DESIGN

Serial cross-sectional.

PARTICIPANTS

All individuals in the PROSPR-I consortium cohorts from 75 to 89 years of age for breast cancer screening, 66-89 years of age for cervical cancer screening, and 76-89 years of age for colorectal cancer screening from 2011 to 2013. The lower age thresholds were based on the guidelines for each respective cancer type.

MAIN MEASURES

Proportion of annual screening by cancer type in relation to age and Charlson comorbidity score and median years of screening past guideline age. We estimated the likelihood of screening past the guideline-based age as a function of age and comorbidity using logistic regression.

KEY RESULTS

The study cohorts included individuals screening for breast (n = 33,475); cervical (n = 459,318); and colorectal (n = 556,356) cancers. In the year following aging out, approximately 30% of the population was screened for breast cancer, 2% of the population was screened for cervical, and almost 5% for colorectal cancer. The median number of years screened past the guideline-based recommendation was 5, 3, and 4 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. Of those screening  > 10 years past the guideline-based age,15%, 46%, and 25% had  ≥ 3 comorbidities respectively. Colorectal cancer screening had the smallest decline in the likelihood of screening beyond the age-based recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

The odds of screening past guideline-based age decreased with comorbidity burden for breast and cervical cancer screening but not for colorectal. These findings suggest the need to evaluate shared decision tools to help patients understand whether screening is appropriate and to generate more evidence in older populations.

Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations

BACKGROUND

Older women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention).

METHODS

In a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years.

RESULTS

A total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Providing information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANZCTRN12623000033640.

Breast Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United States: Results From Real-World Health Records Data

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly interrupted breast cancer screening, an essential preventive service in primary care. We aimed to evaluate the pandemic's impact on overall and follow-up breast cancer screening using real-world health records data.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed a cohort of women eligible for breast cancer screening through the study period from January 1, 2017 to February 28, 2022 using TriNetX Research Network data. We examined the temporal trend of monthly screening volume throughout the study period and compared the rate of adherence to follow-up screening within 24 months after the previous screening when the follow-up screening was due in the pre-COVID period vs the COVID period. To account for multiple screenings in the longitudinal data, we applied a logistic regression model using generalized estimating equations with adjustment for individual-level covariates.

RESULTS

Among 1,186,669 screening-eligible women, the monthly screening volume temporarily decreased by 80.6% from February to April 2020 and then rebounded to close to pre-COVID levels by June 2020. Yet, the follow-up screening rate decreased from 78.9% (95% CI, 78.8%-79.0%) in the pre-COVID period to 77.7% (95% CI, 77.6%-77.8%) in the COVID period. Multivariate regression analysis also showed a lower adherence to follow-up screening during the COVID period (odds ratio = 0.86; 0.86-0.87) and a greater pandemic impact among women aged 65 years and older and women of non-Hispanic "other" race (Asian, American Indian or Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic had a transient negative effect on breast cancer screening overall and a prolonged negative effect on follow-up screening. It also exacerbated gaps in adherence to follow-up screening, especially among certain vulnerable groups, requiring innovative strategies to address potential health disparities in primary care.

Development and Evaluation of Messages for Reducing Overscreening of Breast Cancer in Older Women

BACKGROUND

Many older women are screened for breast cancer beyond guideline-recommended thresholds. One contributor is pro-screening messaging from health care professionals, media, and family/friends. In this project, we developed and evaluated messages for reducing overscreening in older women.

METHODS

We surveyed women ages 65+ who were members of a nationally representative online panel. We constructed 8 messages describing reasons to consider stopping mammograms, including guideline recommendations, false positives, overdiagnosis, and diminishing benefits from screening due to competing risks. Messages varied in their format; some presented statistical evidence, and some described short anecdotes. Each participant was randomized to read 4 of 8 messages. We also randomized participants to one of 3 message sources (clinician, family member, and news story). We assessed whether the message would make participants "want to find out more information" and "think carefully" about mammograms.

RESULTS

Participants (N=790) had a mean age of 73.5 years; 25.8% were non-White. Across all messages, 73.0% of the time, participants agreed that the messages would make them seek more information (range among different messages=64.2%-78.2%); 46.5% of the time participants agreed that the messages would make them think carefully about getting mammograms (range =36.7%-50.7%). Top-rated messages mentioned false-positive anecdotes and overdiagnosis evidence. Ratings were similar for messages from clinicians and news sources, but lower from the family member source.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, participants positively evaluated messages designed to reduce breast cancer overscreening regarding perceived effects on information seeking and deliberation. Combining the top-rated messages into messaging interventions may be a novel approach to reduce overscreening.

Factors Associated With Guideline-concordant and Excessive Cervical Cancer Screening: A Mixed Methods Study

INTRODUCTION

National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years.

METHODS

We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening.

RESULTS

A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) reported that they screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records.

CONCLUSIONS

Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.

Non-use and inadequate use of cervical cancer screening among a representative sample of women in the United States

Introduction

Women's adherence to the United States (U.S.) Preventive Services Task Force guidelines for cervical cancer screening was determined by examining predisposing, enabling, and needs factors from Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use conceptual framework.

Methods

The outcome was operationalized as cervical cancer screening use, non-use, and inadequate-use. Multinomial logistic regression was conducted on data from the 2019 National Health Interview Survey of 7,331 eligible women aged 21-65.

Results

Compared with women who used cervical cancer screening services, women aged 30-65 were less likely to be Non-Users than those aged 21-29. Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian/Alaska Native (AIAN) women were more likely to be Non-Users than White women. More educated women were less likely to be Non-Users. Foreign-born women <10 years in the U.S. were more likely to be Non-Users than U.S.-born women. Women with financial hardship were less likely to be Non-Users. Poorer women and uninsured women were more likely to be Non-Users. Women with children in their household were less likely to be Non-Users than those without children. Women who had a well-visit in the past year were less likely to be Non-Users. Women with a history of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination were less likely to be Non-Users. Compared with women who used cervical cancer screening services, women aged 30-65 were less likely to be Inadequate-Users. AIAN women were more likely to be Inadequate-Users. Women of other races were less likely to be Inadequate-Users. Employed women were less likely to be Inadequate-Users. Uninsured women were more likely to be Inadequate-Users. Women who had a well-visit within a year were less likely to be Inadequate-Users. Women with past HPV vaccination were more likely to be Inadequate-Users. Smokers were less likely to be Inadequate-Users.

Discussion

Predisposing, enabling, and needs factors are differently associated with non-use and inadequate use of cervical cancer screening. Understanding factors associated with the use, non-use, and inadequate use of cervical cancer screening is crucial to avoid or curb unnecessary tests, increased costs to both society and individuals, and the ill-allocation of limited resources.

Race and ethnicity are inadequate predictors of ambulatory visit length and utilization of preventive services

Health disparities can be experienced by any disadvantaged group who has limited access to healthcare or decreased quality of care. Quality of care can be measured by physician-patient communication measures such as length of visit, health outcomes, patient satisfaction, or by the services one receives such as screening or health education. This study aims to determine the relationship between length of physician-patient encounter, number of preventive services, ethnicity, and race. This study utilizes data from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) from 2007 to 2016. Visits with a single diagnosis were selected. Visits with the five most frequent diagnoses were selected by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth or Tenth Revision (ICD-9/ICD-10) classification. The primary outcome is time spent with a physician in minutes and the number of preventive services provided represented by the Preventive Service Index (PSI). Of 255,916 visits, non-white individuals made up 16.2% (95% Confidence Interval 15.9-16.4) while Latinos represented 13.4% (95%CI 13.2-13.6) of individuals. Multivariate analysis revealed minimal differences in visit length in race and ethnic groups regardless of diagnosis. Greater PSI was associated with individuals less than 43 years old (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.0, 95% CI 1.8-2.3, p =< 0.0001), those who reside in metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs) (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p = 0.006), non-white individuals (OR 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3, p = 0.004), and those with private insurance (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.4, p =< 0.0001). Race and ethnicity do not predict length of time with a physician regardless of diagnosis. Age, race, location within a metropolitan area, and insurance are significant but minimal predictors of receiving preventive services in the rank-order leading five most frequent diagnoses. This large, population-based study highlights improvements in the distribution of healthcare services from previous studies.

Racial Disparities in Low-Value Care in the Last Year of Life for Medicare Beneficiaries With Neurodegenerative Disease

Background and Objectives

There are racial disparities in health care services received by patients with neurodegenerative diseases, but little is known about disparities in the last year of life, specifically in high-value and low-value care utilization. This study evaluated racial disparities in the utilization of high-value and low-value care in the last year of life among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia or Parkinson disease.

Methods

This was a retrospective, population-based cohort analysis using data from North and South Carolina fee-for-service Medicare claims between 2013 and 2017. We created a decedent cohort of beneficiaries aged 50 years or older at diagnosis with dementia or Parkinson disease. Specific low-value utilization outcomes were selected from the Choosing Wisely initiative, including cancer screening, peripheral artery stenting, and feeding tube placement in the last year of life. Low-value outcomes included hospitalization, emergency department visits, neuroimaging services, and number of days receiving skilled nursing. High-value outcomes included receipt of occupational and physical therapy, hospice care, and medications indicated for dementia and/or Parkinson disease.

Results

Among 70,650 decedents, 13,753 were Black, 55,765 were White, 93.1% had dementia, and 7.7% had Parkinson disease. Adjusting for age, sex, Medicaid dual enrollment status, rural vs urban location, state (NC and SC), and comorbidities, Black decedents were more likely to receive low-value care including colorectal cancer screening (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.46 [1.32-1.61]), peripheral artery stenting (aHR 1.72 [1.43-2.08]), and feeding tube placement (aHR 2.96 [2.70-3.24]) and less likely to receive physical therapy (aHR 0.73 [0.64-0.85)], dementia medications (aHR 0.90 [0.86-0.95]), or Parkinson disease medications (aHR 0.88 [0.75-1.02]) within the last year of life. Black decedents were more likely to be hospitalized (aHR 1.28 [1.25-1.32]), more likely to be admitted to skilled nursing (aHR 1.09 [1.05-1.13]), and less likely to be admitted to hospice (aHR 0.82 [0.79-0.85]) than White decedents.

Discussion

We found racial disparities in care utilization among patients with neurodegenerative disease in the last year of life, such that Black decedents were more likely to receive specific low-value care services and less likely to receive high-value supportive care than White decedents, even after adjusting for health status and socioeconomic factors.

Frequency of Guideline-Discordant Prostate Cancer Screening Among Older Males

This cross-sectional study examines the association of life expectancy and prostate cancer screening practices among older males using data from a national survey.

"It Can't Hurt!": Why Many Patients With Limited Life Expectancy Decide to Accept Lung Cancer Screening

PURPOSE

Lung cancer screening (LCS) has less benefit and greater potential for iatrogenic harm among people with multiple comorbidities and limited life expectancy. Yet, such individuals are more likely to undergo screening than healthier LCS-eligible people. We sought to understand how patients with marginal LCS benefit conceptualize their health and make decisions regarding LCS.

METHODS

We interviewed 40 people with multimorbidity and limited life expectancy, as determined by high Care Assessment Need scores, which predict 1-year risk of hospitalization or death. Patients were recruited from 6 Veterans Health Administration facilities after discussing LCS with their clinician. We conducted a thematic analysis using constant comparison to explore factors that influence LCS decision making.

RESULTS

Patients commonly held positive beliefs about screening and perceived LCS to be noninvasive. When posed with hypothetical scenarios of limited benefit, patients emphasized the nonlongevity benefits of LCS (eg, peace of mind, planning for the future) and generally did not consider their health status or life expectancy when making decisions regarding LCS. Most patients were unaware of possible additional evaluations or treatment of screen-detected findings, but when probed further, many expressed concerns about the potential need for multiple evaluations, referrals, or invasive procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in this study with multimorbidity and limited life expectancy were unaware of their greater risk of potential harm when accepting LCS. Given patient trust in clinician recommendations, it is important that clinicians engage patients with marginal LCS benefit in shared decision making, ensuring that their values of desiring more information about their health are weighed against potential harms from further evaluations.

Health benefits and harms of mammography screening in older women (75+ years)-a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is little evidence on the balance between potential benefits and harms of mammography screening in women 75 years and older. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise the evidence on the outcomes of mammography screening in women aged 75 years and older.

METHODS

A systematic review of mammography screening studies in women aged 75 years and over.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included in this review: 27 observational studies and 9 modelling studies. Many of the included studies used no or uninformative comparison groups resulting in a potential bias towards the benefits of screening. Despite this, there was mixed evidence about the benefits and harms of continuing mammography screening beyond the age of 75 years. Some studies showed a beneficial effect on breast cancer mortality, and other studies showed no effect on mortality. Some studies showed some harms (false positive tests and recalls) being comparable to those in younger age-groups, with other studies showing increase in false positive screens and biopsies in older age-group. Although reported in fewer studies, there was consistent evidence of increased overdiagnosis in older age-groups.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence available to make a recommendation for/against continuing breast screening beyond the age of 75 years. Future studies should use more informative comparisons and should estimate overdiagnosis given potentially substantial harm in this age-group due to competing causes of death. This review was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020203131).

Cervical cancer (over-)screening in Europe: Balancing organised and opportunistic programmes

AIMS

Cervical cancer (CC) over-screening has been understudied in Europe, yet is relevant for approaching inequalities in screening uptake. Focusing on countries' screening strategies (opportunistic systems versus organised programmes), we assess in which contexts CC over-screening is more prevalent, and which women are more likely to have engaged in cervical cancer screening (CCS) within the past year.

METHODS

A two-level (multilevel) design among screening women (N = 80,761) nested in 31 European countries was used to analyse data from the second wave (2013-2015) of the European Health Interview Survey. We focused on over-screening, defined as screening more frequently than the three-yearly screening interval prescribed in the European guidelines - that is, having screened within the past year.

RESULTS

Higher levels of over-screening were observed in opportunistic systems compared to systems with organised programmes. In opportunistic systems, women with a higher socioeconomic position had a higher likelihood of being screened within the past year than their socioeconomic counterparts. Moreover, these differences diminished under organised programmes.

CONCLUSIONS

Contexts with organised CCS programmes are more efficiently reducing over-screening, and enforcing the European guidelines. We suggest that the physician-patient relationship is an essential pathway for explaining socioeconomic differences in CC (over-)screening and for future interventions.

Factors Influencing Primary Care Practitioners' Cancer Screening Recommendations for Older Adults: a Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Primary care practitioners (PCPs) play a key role in cancer screening decisions for older adults (≥ 65 years), but recommendations vary by cancer type and jurisdiction.

PURPOSE

To examine the factors influencing PCPs' recommendations for breast, cervical, prostate, and colorectal cancer screening for older adults.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, searched from 1 January 2000 to July 2021, and citation searching in July 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Assessed factors influencing PCPs' breast, prostate, colorectal, or cervical cancer screening decisions for older adults' (defined either as ≥ 65 years or < 10-year life expectancy).

DATA EXTRACTION

Two authors independently conducted data extraction and quality appraisal. Decisions were crosschecked and discussed where necessary.

DATA SYNTHESIS

From 1926 records, 30 studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty were quantitative, nine were qualitative, and one used a mixed method design. Twenty-nine were conducted in the USA, and one in the UK. Factors were synthesized into six categories: patient demographic characteristics, patient health characteristics, patient and clinician psycho-social factors, clinician characteristics, and health system factors. Patient preference was most reported as influential across both quantitative and qualitative studies. Age, health status, and life expectancy were also commonly influential, but PCPs held nuanced views about life expectancy. Weighing benefits/harms was also commonly reported with variation across cancer screening types. Other factors included patient screening history, clinician attitudes/personal experiences, patient/provider relationship, guidelines, reminders, and time.

LIMITATIONS

We could not conduct a meta-analysis due to variability in study designs and measurement. The vast majority of included studies were conducted in the USA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although PCPs play a role in individualizing cancer screening for older adults, multi-level interventions are needed to improve these decisions. Decision support should continue to be developed and implemented to support informed choice for older adults and assist PCPs to consistently provide evidence-based recommendations.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021268219.

FUNDING SOURCE

NHMRC APP1113532.

When should electronic medical records reminders for cancer screening stop?-Results from a national physician survey

BACKGROUND

Many older adults are screened for breast and colorectal cancers beyond guideline recommended thresholds. Electronic medical record (EMR) reminders are commonly used to prompt cancer screening. Behavioral economics theory suggests that changing the default settings for these reminders can be effective to reduce over-screening. We examined physician perspectives about acceptable thresholds for stopping EMR cancer screening reminders.

METHODS

In a national survey of 1200 primary care physicians (PCP) and 600 gynecologists randomly selected from the AMA Masterfile, we asked physicians to choose whether EMR reminders for cancer screening should stop based on a list of criteria that included age, life expectancy, specific serious illnesses, and functional limitations. Physicians could choose multiple responses. PCPs were randomized to questions about breast or colorectal cancer screening.

RESULTS

A total of 592 physicians participated (adjusted response rate 54.1%). 54.6% chose age and 71.8% chose life expectancy as criteria for stopping EMR reminders; only 30.6% chose functional limitations. Regarding age thresholds, 52.4% chose ages ≤75, 42.0% chose a threshold between 75 and 85, 5.6% would not stop reminders even at age 85. Regarding life expectancy thresholds, 32.0% chose ≥10 years, 53.1% chose a threshold between 5 and 9 years, 14.9% would not stop reminders even when life expectancy is <5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that many physicians would continue EMR reminders for cancer screening even in light of older age, limited life expectancy, and functional limitations. This may reflect reluctance to stop cancer screening and/or reluctance to stop EMR reminders so that physicians can retain control to decide for individual patients, for example, to assess patient preference and ability to tolerate treatment. There was consensus for stopping EMR reminders at ages 85+ and <5-year life expectancy. Interventions that seek to reduce over-screening by suppressing EMR reminders may be important for these groups but may have limited physician buy-in outside these thresholds.

Types of usual sources of care and their association with healthcare outcomes among cancer survivors: a Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) study

PURPOSE

To assess associations between usual source of care (USC) type and health status, healthcare access, utilization, and expenses among adult cancer survivors.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional analysis using 2013-2018 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey included 2690 observations representing 31,953,477 adult cancer survivors who were currently experiencing cancer and reporting one of five USC types: solo practicing physician (SPP), a specific person in a non-hospital facility, a specific person in a hospital-based facility, a non-hospital facility, and a hospital-based facility. We used logistic regressions and generalized linear models to determine associations of USC type with health status, healthcare access, utilization, and expenses, adjusting for patient demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

All non-SPP USC types were associated with reporting more difficulties contacting USC by telephone during business hours (p < 0.05). Compared to SPP, non-hospital facility was associated with more difficulty getting needed prescriptions (OR: 1.81, p = 0.036) and higher annual expenses ($5225, p = 0.028), and hospital-based facility was associated with longer travel time (OR: 1.61, p = 048), more ED visits (0.13, p = 0.049), higher expenses ($6028, p = 0.014), and worse self-reported health status (OR: 1.93, p = 0.001), although both were more likely to open on nights/weekends (p < 0.05). Cancer survivors with a specific person in a hospital-based facility (vs. SPP) as USC were > twofold as likely (p < 0.05) to report difficulty getting needed prescriptions and contacting USC afterhours.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adult cancer survivors who were currently experiencing cancer, having a non-SPP type of UCS was associated with reporting more difficulties accessing care, worse health, more ED visits, and higher total expenses.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Transitioning to SPP type of USC may result in better healthcare outcomes.

Gardening Is Associated With Better Cardiovascular Health Status Among Older Adults in the United States: Analysis of the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey

BACKGROUND

Gardening benefits health in older adults, but previous studies have limited generalizability or do not adequately adjust for sociodemographic factors or physical activity (PA).

OBJECTIVE

We examined health outcomes, fruits and vegetables (F&V) intake, and 10-year mortality risk among gardeners and exercisers compared with nonexercisers.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional data of noninstitutionalized US adults in the 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System was collected via landline and cellular phone survey.

PARTICIPANTS/SETTING

Adults 65 years and older reporting any PA (n = 146,047) were grouped as gardeners, exercisers, or nonexercisers.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcomes included cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors, mental and physical health, F&V intake, and 10-year mortality risk.

STATISTICAL ANALYSES

Summary statistics were calculated and adjusted logistic regression models were conducted to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% CIs, accounting for the complex survey design.

RESULTS

The sample included gardeners (10.2%), exercisers (60.0%), and nonexercisers (30.8%). Gardeners, compared with nonexercisers, had significantly lower odds of reporting all studied health outcomes and higher odds of consuming 5 or more F&V per day (CVD: aOR 0.60, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.68; stroke: aOR 0.55, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64; heart attack: aOR 0.63, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.73, high cholesterol: aOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.93; high blood pressure: aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.81; diabetes: aOR 0.51, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.56; body mass index ≥25: aOR 0.74, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.80; poor mental health status: aOR 0.50, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.59; poor physical health status: aOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.39; 5 or more F&V per day: aOR 1.56, 95% CI 1.40 to 1.57; high 10-year mortality risk: aOR 0.39, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.42). Male and female gardeners had significantly lower odds of reporting diabetes even when compared with exercisers.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults 65 years and older, gardening is associated with better CVD health status, including lower odds of diabetes. Future longitudinal or interventional studies are warranted to determine whether promoting gardening activities can be a CVD risk reduction strategy.

Women's experiences of age-related discontinuation from mammography screening: A qualitative interview study

INTRODUCTION

In Denmark, women are discontinued from mammography screening at age 69 due to decreased likelihood of benefits and increased likelihood of harm. The risk of harm increases with age and includes false positives, overdiagnosis and overtreatment. In a questionnaire survey, 24 women expressed unsolicited concerns about being discontinued from mammography screening due to age. This calls for further investigation of experiences related to discontinuation from screening.

METHODS

We invited the women, who had left comments on the questionnaire, to participate in in-depth interviews with the purpose to explore their reactions, preferences, and conceptions about mammography screening and discontinuation. The interviews lasted 1-4 h and were followed up with a telephone interview 2 weeks after the initial interview.

RESULTS

The women had high expectations of the benefits of mammography screening and felt that participation was a moral obligation. Following that, they perceived the screening discontinuation as a result of societal age discrimination and consequently felt devalued. Further, the women perceived the discontinuation as a health threat, felt more susceptible to late diagnosis and death, and therefore sought out new ways to control their risk of breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

Our findings indicate that the age-related discontinuation from mammography screening might be of more importance than previously assumed. This study raises important questions about screening ethics, and we encourage research to explore this in other settings.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

This study was conducted as a result of the women's unsolicited concerns about being discontinued from screening. This particular group contributed to the study with their own statements, interpretations and perspectives on the discontinuation of screening, and the initial analysis of data was discussed with the women during follow-up interviews.

Cervical Cancer Stage at Diagnosis and Survival among Women ≥65 Years in California

BACKGROUND

Through adequate screening and follow-up, cervical cancer can be prevented or detected at early-stage (stage I), which is related to excellent survival. Current guidelines recommend discontinuing screening for women ≥65 years with history of normal Pap and/or HPV tests, potentially leaving this age group vulnerable. This study examined late-stage disease in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

Using California Cancer Registry data, we identified 12,442 patients ages ≥21 years with a first primary cervical cancer diagnosed during 2009-2018. Proportions of late-stage disease (stages II-IV) and early- and late-stage 5-year relative survival are presented by the age group. Among patients ages ≥65 years, multivariable logistic regression estimated associations of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with late-stage cervical cancer.

RESULTS

Nearly one fifth of patients (n = 2,171, 17.4%) were ≥65 years. More women ages ≥65 years (71%) presented with late-stage disease than younger women (48% in patients ages <65). Late-stage 5-year relative survival was lower for women ≥65 years (23.2%-36.8%) compared with patients <65 (41.5%-51.5%). Characteristics associated with late-stage cervical cancer in women ≥65 years included older age [odds ratio (OR), 1.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01-1.04; each year], non-adenocarcinoma histologic subtypes, and comorbidities (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.21-2.08).

CONCLUSIONS

There remains a significant burden of advanced cervical cancer in women ≥65.

IMPACT

Efforts should be made to better understand how the current screening paradigm is failing women of 65 years and older. Future work should focus on determining past screening history, lapses in follow-up care, and non-invasive testing approaches.

Development of Japanese Cancer Intelligence Quotient to Measure Cancer Literacy and Knowledge among Japanese Laypersons

INTRODUCTION

Health literacy has been identified an essential factor in leading a healthy lifestyle. Because some cancer prevention and screening methods have been established, we believe that identifying disadvantaged populations with low literacy regarding cancer is crucial. Thus, in this study, we aim to create a self-administered cancer-specific health literacy scale to be administered to Japanese laypersons.

METHODS

Using definitions from previous studies, we constructed a scale named the Japanese Cancer Intelligence Quotient (JCIQ) for both literacy (JCIQ-L) and knowledge (JCIQ-K) aspects. We generated potential items for both aspects, extracted appropriate ones using two-step online surveys, and compared the JCIQ and cancer-preventive behaviors and cancer-screening intentions, both of which we set as alternative indicators of the right attitude and practice toward cancer by performing a multiple regression analysis from another web survey.

RESULTS

Between April and May 2020, we conducted three-step surveys online. After conducting the two-step surveys for thousands of people, we extracted 12 literacy questions and 22 knowledge questions using factor analysis and the correct answer ratio of every item. In the final investigation of 3,094 people, a multiple regression analysis found that the JCIQ-L and JCIQ-K were significant factors in terms of predicting both behaviors (JCIQ-L:β = 0.07, p < 0.001, JCIQ-K:β = 0.05, p < 0.01) and willingness (JCIQ-L:β = 0.04, p < 0.05, JCIQ-K:β = 0.17, p < 0.001) after adjusting for participant characteristics (e.g., gender, age, income level, employment status).

CONCLUSIONS

We developed the first reliable scale for measuring cancer literacy and knowledge of Japanese laypersons.

Integrated interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of multiple cancer screenings: conceptual framework, determinants of implementation success, measurement challenges, and research priorities

BACKGROUND

Screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer has been shown to reduce mortality; however, not all men and women are screened in the USA. Further, there are disparities in screening uptake by people from racial and ethnic minority groups, people with low income, people who lack health insurance, and those who lack access to care. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funds two programs-the Colorectal Cancer Control Program and the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program-to help increase cancer screenings among groups that have been economically and socially marginalized. The goal of this manuscript is to describe how programs and their partners integrate evidence-based interventions (e.g., patient reminders) and supporting activities (e.g., practice facilitation to optimize electronic medical records) across colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas based on implementation science.

METHODS

We conducted an exploratory assessment using qualitative and quantitative data to describe implementation of integrated interventions and supporting activities for cancer screening. We conducted 10 site visits and follow-up telephone interviews with health systems and their partners to inform the integration processes. We developed a conceptual model to describe the integration processes and reviewed screening recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force to illustrate challenges in integration. To identify factors important in program implementation, we asked program implementers to rank domains and constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

Health systems integrated interventions for all screenings across single and multiple levels. Although potentially efficient, there were challenges due to differing eligibility of screenings by age, gender, frequency, and location of services. Program implementers ranked complexity, cost, implementation climate, and engagement of appropriate staff in implementation among the most important factors to success.

CONCLUSION

Integrating interventions and supporting activities to increase uptake of cancer screenings could be an effective and efficient approach, but we currently do not have the evidence to recommend widescale adoption. Detailed multilevel measures related to process, screening, and implementation outcomes, and cost are required to evaluate integrated programs. Systematic studies can help to ascertain the benefits of integrating interventions and supporting activities for multiple cancer screenings, and we suggest research areas that might address current gaps in the literature.

"It's something I'll do until I die": A qualitative examination into why older women in the U.S. continue screening mammography

BACKGROUND

Professional guidelines in the U.S. do not recommend routine screening mammography for women ≥75 years with limited life expectancy and/or poor health. Yet, routine mammography remains widely used in older women. We examined older women's experiences, beliefs, and opinions about screening mammography in relation to aging and health.

METHODS

We performed thematic analysis of transcribed semi-structured interviews with 19 women who had a recent screening visit at a mammography clinic in New York City (average age: 75 years, 63% Hispanic, 53% ≤high school education).

RESULTS

Three main themes emerged: (1) older women typically perceive mammograms as a positive, beneficial, and routine component of care; (2) participation in routine mammography is reinforced by factors at interpersonal, provider, and healthcare system levels; and (3) older women do not endorse discontinuation of screening mammography due to advancing age or poor health, but some may be receptive to reducing screening frequency. Only a few older women reported having discussed mammography cessation or the potential harms of screening with their providers. A few women reported they would insist on receiving mammography even without a provider recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

Older women's positive experiences and views, as well as multilevel and frequently automated cues toward mammography are important drivers of routine screening in older women. These findings suggest a need for synergistic patient, provider, and system level strategies to reduce mammography overuse in older women.

Factors Associated With Clinician Recommendations for Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Average-Risk Patients: Data From a National Survey

Introduction

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among average-risk patients is underused in the US. Clinician recommendation is strongly associated with CRC screening completion. To inform interventions that improve CRC screening uptake among average-risk patients, we examined clinicians’ routine recommendations of 7 guideline-recommended screening methods and factors associated with these recommendations.

Methods

We conducted an online survey in November and December 2019 among a sample of primary care clinicians (PCCs) and gastroenterologists (GIs) from a panel of US clinicians. Clinicians reported whether they routinely recommend each screening method, screening method intervals, and patient age at which they stop recommending screening. We also measured the influence of various factors on screening recommendations.

Results

Nearly all 814 PCCs (99%) and all 159 GIs (100%) reported that they routinely recommend colonoscopy for average-risk patients, followed by stool-based tests (more than two-thirds of PCCs and GIs). Recommendation of other visualization-based methods was less frequent (PCCs, 26%–35%; GIs, 30%–41%). A sizable proportion of clinicians reported guideline-discordant screening intervals and age to stop screening. Guidelines and clinical evidence were most frequently reported as very influential to clinician recommendations. Factors associated with routine recommendation of each screening method included clinician-perceived effectiveness of the method, clinician familiarity with the method, Medicare coverage, clinical capacity, and patient adherence.

Conclusion

Clinician education is needed to improve knowledge, familiarity, and experience with guideline-recommended screening methods with the goal of effectively engaging patients in informed decision making for CRC screening.

Utilization of Mammography During the Last Year of Life Among Older Breast Cancer Survivors

Background: Mammography is generally recommended for breast cancer survivors. However, discussion is ongoing about stopping surveillance mammography when life expectancy is <5-10 years as the benefit of screening might be diminished toward the end of life. The utilization pattern of mammography in the last year of life among this population has not been well studied. Methods: We identified 58,736 females diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2002 and December 2015, who died at the age of at least 67, from the SEER-Medicare database. We examined the utilization patterns of mammography during their last year of life and investigated factors associated with the use of mammography at the end of life using a multivariable logistic regression model. Results: Overall, 28.5% of the patients received mammography during the last year of life. Multivariable logistic regression showed that older age (OR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.29-0.34, p < 0.001 for 95 vs. 85 years old), more advanced cancer stage (OR = 0.22, 95% CI = 0.20-0.24 p < 0.001 for distant vs. localized disease), and higher comorbidity score (OR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.91-0.93, p < 0.001 for every 1-point increase) were associated with less mammography use. Age was nonlinearly associated with mammography use, with a steady proportion of patients receiving a mammography until approximately age 80 and then a sharp decrease thereafter. Conclusion: This population-based study found that a sizable proportion of older breast cancer survivors received mammography during the last year of life.

The Impact of 4 Risk Communication Interventions on Cancer Screening Preferences and Knowledge

PURPOSE

The US Preventive Services Task Force has changed their screening recommendations, encouraging informed patient choice and shared decision making as a result of emerging evidence. We aimed to compare the impact of a didactic intervention, a descriptive harms intervention, a narrative intervention, and a new risk communication strategy titled Aiding Risk Information learning through Simulated Experience (ARISE) on preferences for a hypothetical beneficial cancer screening test (one that reduces the chance of cancer death or extends life) versus a hypothetical screening test with no proven physical benefits.

METHOD

A total of 3386 men and women aged 40 to 70 completed an online survey about prostate or breast cancer screening. Participants were randomly assigned to either an unbeneficial test condition (0 lives saved due to screening) or a beneficial test condition (1 life saved due to screening). Participants then reviewed 4 informational interventions about either breast (women) or prostate (men) cancer screening. First, participants were provided didactic information alongside an explicit recommendation. This was followed by a descriptive harms intervention in which the possible harms of overdetection were explained. Participants then viewed 2 additional interventions: a narrative and ARISE (an intervention in which participants learned about probabilities by viewing simulated outcomes). The order of these last 2 interventions was randomized. Preference for being screened with the test and knowledge about the test were measured.

RESULTS

With each successive intervention, preferences for screening tests decreased an equivalent amount for both a beneficial and unbeneficial test. Knowledge about the screening tests was largely unimpacted by the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Presenting detailed risk and benefit information, narratives, and ARISE reduced preferences for screening regardless of the net public benefit of screening.

Discontinuing Cancer Screening for Older Adults: a Comparison of Clinician Decision-Making for Breast, Colorectal, and Prostate Cancer Screenings

BACKGROUND

While guidelines recommend against routine screening for breast, prostate, and colorectal cancers in older adults (65+ years) with <10-year life expectancy, many of these patients continue to be screened. How clinicians consider screening cessation across multiple cancer screening types is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and contrast clinicians' perspectives on discontinuing breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer screenings in older adults.

DESIGN

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

Primary care clinicians in Maryland (N=30) APPROACH: We conducted semi-structured interviews with individual clinicians. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using standard techniques of qualitative content analysis to identify major themes.

KEY RESULTS

Participants were mostly physicians (24/30) and women (16/30). Four major themes highlighted differences in decision-making across cancer screenings: (1) Clinicians reported more often screening beyond guideline-recommended ages for breast and prostate cancers than colorectal cancer; (2) clinicians had different priorities when considering the benefits/harms of each screening; for example, some prioritized continuing colorectal cancer screening due to the test's high efficacy while others prioritized stopping colorectal cancer screening due to high procedural risk; some prioritized continuing prostate cancer screening due to poor outcomes from advanced prostate cancer while others prioritized stopping prostate cancer screening due to high false positive test rates and harms from downstream tests; (3) clinicians discussed harms of prostate and colorectal cancer screening more readily than for breast cancer screening; (4) clinicians perceived more involvement with gastroenterologists in colonoscopy decisions and less involvement from specialists for prostate and breast cancer screening.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results highlight the need for more explicit guidance on how to weigh competing considerations in cancer screening (such as test accuracy versus ease of cancer treatment after detection). Recognizing the complexity of the benefit/harms analysis as clinicians consider multiple cancer screenings, future decision support tools, and clinician education materials can specifically address the competing considerations.

Patient-Reported Factors Associated With Older Adults' Cancer Screening Decision-making: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Decisions for older adults (aged ≥65 years) and their clinicians about whether to continue to screen for cancer are not easy. Many older adults who are frail or have limited life expectancy or comorbidities continue to be screened for cancer despite guidelines suggesting they should not; furthermore, many older adults have limited knowledge of the potential harms of continuing to be screened.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the patient-reported factors associated with older adults' decisions regarding screening for breast, prostate, colorectal, and cervical cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Studies were identified by searching databases from January 2000 to June 2020 and were independently assessed for inclusion by 2 authors. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently conducted by 2 authors, and then all decisions were cross-checked and discussed where necessary. Data analysis was performed from September to December 2020.

FINDINGS

The search yielded 2475 records, of which 21 unique studies were included. Nine studies were quantitative, 8 were qualitative, and 4 used mixed method designs. Of the 21 studies, 17 were conducted in the US, and 10 of 21 assessed breast cancer screening decisions only. Factors associated with decision-making were synthesized into 5 categories: demographic, health and clinical, psychological, physician, and social and system. Commonly identified factors associated with the decision to undergo screening included personal or family history of cancer, positive screening attitudes, routine or habit, to gain knowledge, friends, and a physician's recommendation. Factors associated with the decision to forgo screening included being older, negative screening attitudes, and desire not to know about cancer. Some factors had varying associations, including insurance coverage, living in a nursing home, prior screening experience, health problems, limited life expectancy, perceived cancer risk, risks of screening, family, and a physician's recommendation to stop.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although guidelines suggest incorporating life expectancy and health status to inform older adults' cancer screening decisions, older adults' ingrained beliefs about screening may run counter to these concepts. Communication strategies are needed that support older adults to make informed cancer screening decisions by addressing underlying screening beliefs in context with their perceived and actual risk of developing cancer.

Cancer screening in the U.S. through the COVID-19 pandemic, recovery, and beyond

COVID-19 has proved enormously disruptive to the provision of cancer screening, which does not just represent an initial test but an entire process, including risk detection, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. Successful delivery of services at all points in the process has been negatively affected by the pandemic. There is a void in empirical high-quality evidence to support a specific strategy for administering cancer screening during a pandemic and its resolution phase, but several pragmatic considerations can help guide prioritization efforts. Targeting guideline-eligible people who have never been screened, or those who are significantly out of date with screening, has the potential to maximize benefits now and into the future. Disruptions to care due to the pandemic could represent an unparalleled opportunity to reassess early detection programs towards an explicit, thoughtful, and just prioritization of populations historically experiencing cancer disparities. By focusing screening services on populations that have the most to gain, and by careful and deliberate planning for the period following the pandemic, we can positively affect cancer outcomes for all.

Utilization of Women’s Preventive Health Services During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Question

How has utilization of preventive health services among commercially insured women changed during the COVID-19 pandemic?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study of 685 373 women enrolled in a large commercial health maintenance organization plan in Michigan, rates of breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, sexually transmitted infection screening, and prescriptions and new insertions for contraceptives all significantly declined in 2020 compared with 2019. For some services, there were small declines in utilization among women residing in zip codes that are lower income with higher proportions of non-White and non–English-speaking residents.

Meaning

The pandemic has disrupted the utilization of women’s preventive health services and may be associated with increased disparities in access to these services.

Importance

The association of the COVID-19 pandemic with women’s preventive health care use is unknown.

Objective

To describe utilization of women’s preventive health services.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Cross-sectional study of women aged 18 to 74 years enrolled in a commercial health maintenance organization in Michigan.

Exposures

COVID-19 pandemic (2019-2020).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of receiving breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) insertions, and pharmacy-obtained contraception, adjusted for month, age, county, zip code characteristics (per-capita income, non-White percentage of population, non–English-proficient percentage of population), and plan designation (primary plan holder vs dependent).

Results

The study population included 685 373 women aged 18 to 74 years, enrolled for 13 000 715 person-months, of whom 10 061 275 person-months (77.4%) were among women aged 25 to 64 years and 8 020 215 (61.7%) were the primary plan holder, with mean zip code per capita income of $33 708, 20.2% mean zip code non-White population, and 3.4% mean zip code non–English-speaking population. For services requiring an in-person visit (breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, STI testing, and LARC insertions), utilization declined by 60% to 90% during the spring of 2020, with a nadir in April 2020, after which utilization for all services recovered to close to 2019 levels by July 2020. Claims for pharmacy-obtained hormonal contraceptives in 2020 were consistently 15% to 30% lower than 2019. The AORs of a woman receiving a given preventive service in 2020 compared with 2019 were significantly lower for breast cancer screening (AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79-0.80), cervical cancer screening (AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.80-0.81), STI screening (AOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.82-0.84), LARC insertion (AOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90), and pharmacy-obtained contraception (AOR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74) (all P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of women enrolled in a large US commercial health maintenance organization plan, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with large but transient declines in rates of breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, STI screening, and LARC insertions, and moderate persistent declines in pharmacy-obtained hormonal contraceptives. The overall odds of a woman receiving a given preventive service in 2020 was 20% to 30% lower than 2019. Further research into disparities in access to care and the health outcomes of decreased use of these key health services is warranted.

DeImplementing Ineffective and Low-Value Clinical Practices: Research and Practice Opportunities in Community Oncology Settings

Patients, practitioners, and policy makers are increasingly concerned about the delivery of ineffective or low-value clinical practices in cancer care settings. Research is needed on how to effectively deimplement these types of practices from cancer care. In this commentary, we spotlight the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), a national network of community oncology practices, and elaborate on how it is an ideal infrastructure for conducting rigorous, real-world research on deimplementation. We describe key multilevel issues that affect deimplementation and also serve as a guidepost for developing strategies to drive deimplementation. We describe optimal study designs for testing deimplementation strategies and elaborate on how and why the NCORP network is uniquely positioned to conduct rigorous and impactful deimplementation trials. The number and diversity of affiliated community oncology care sites, coupled with the overall objective of improving cancer care delivery, make the NCORP an opportune infrastructure for advancing deimplementation research while simultaneously improving the care of millions of cancer patients nationwide.