Towards personalized screening: Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes in women with and without a first-degree relative with a history of breast cancer

Dutch women's intended participation in a risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention programme: a survey study identifying preferences, facilitators and barriers

BACKGROUND

Risk-based breast cancer screening may improve the benefit-harm ratio of screening by tailoring policy to a woman's personal breast cancer risk. This study aims to explore Dutch women's preferences regarding the organisation and implementation of a risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention programme, identifying potential barriers and facilitators to uptake.

METHODS

A total of 5110 participants in the Dutch Personalised RISk-based MAmmography screening (PRISMA) study were invited, of whom 942 completed a two-part web-based survey. The first part contained questions about personal characteristics; for the second part, women were randomly assigned to one of four hypothetical breast cancer risk scenarios (i.e. low, average, moderate, or high) with subsequent tailored screening and prevention advice. Descriptive statistics are used to present women's organisational preferences. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed using seven proxy measures for acceptability of risk-based screening (e.g., interest in risk) and risk-based prevention (e.g., willingness to change diet).

RESULTS

Interest in breast cancer risk was high (80.3%). Higher assigned risk scenario was most consistently associated with acceptance of tailored screening and prevention recommendations. Increased acceptance of lifestyle changes was additionally associated with higher education. Having a first degree family history of breast cancer decreased women's motivation to participate in preventative lifestyle measures. Acceptability of medication was associated with a woman's general beliefs about the (over)use and benefit-harm balance of medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Dutch women generally appear in favour of receiving their breast cancer risk estimate with subsequent tailored screening and prevention recommendations. However, women's level of acceptance depends on their assigned risk category. Offering tailored screening and prevention recommendations to low-risk women will be most challenging. Educating women on the benefits and harms of all risk-based screening and prevention strategies is key to acceptability and informed decision-making.

Evaluating the Age-Based Recommendations for Long-Term Follow-Up in Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

After 5 years of annual follow-up following breast cancer, Dutch guidelines are age based: annual follow-up for women <60 years, 60-75 years biennial, and none for >75 years. We determined how the risk of recurrence corresponds to these consensus-based recommendations and to the risk of primary breast cancer in the general screening population.

SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS

Women with early-stage breast cancer in 2003/2005 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (n = 18,568). Cumulative incidence functions were estimated for follow-up years 5-10 for locoregional recurrences (LRRs) and second primary tumors (SPs). Risks were compared with the screening population without history of breast cancer. Alternative cutoffs for age were determined by log-rank tests.

RESULTS

The cumulative risk for LRR/SP was lower in women <60 years (5.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.3-6.6) who are under annual follow-up than for women 60-75 (6.3%, 95% CI 5.6-7.1) receiving biennial visits. All risks were higher than the 5-year risk of a primary tumor in the screening population (ranging from 1.4% to 1.9%). Age cutoffs <50, 50-69, and > 69 revealed better risk differentiation and would provide more risk-based schedules. Still, other factors, including systemic treatments, had an even greater impact on recurrence risks.

CONCLUSION

The current consensus-based recommendations use suboptimal age cutoffs. The proposed alternative cutoffs will lead to a more balanced risk-based follow-up and thereby more efficient allocation of resources. However, more factors should be taken into account for truly individualizing follow-up based on risk for recurrence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The current age-based recommendations for breast cancer follow-up after 5 years are suboptimal and do not reflect the actual risk of recurrent disease. This results in situations in which women with higher risks actually receive less follow-up than those with a lower risk of recurrence. Alternative cutoffs could be a start toward risk-based follow-up and thereby more efficient allocation of resources. However, age, or any single risk factor, is not able to capture the risk differences and therefore is not sufficient for determining follow-up. More risk factors should be taken into account for truly individualizing follow-up based on the risk for recurrence.

Is a Family History of the Breast Cancer Related to Women's Cancer Prevention Behaviors?

Families share behavioral risk factors that can increase the risk of cancer development. We examined whether having a positive family breast cancer history is associated with health behaviors/screening practices. Analyses were based on a cross-sectional sample of 545 Brazilian National Cancer Institute Hospital patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer in 2013/2014. Women were categorized according to their breast cancer family history. Age-adjusted Poisson regressions with robust variance were performed to estimate the association between breast cancer family history and selected health-related behaviors and screening practices. About one fourth of women reported a positive family history of breast cancer. Contrary to expectation, we found that women with a family history of breast cancer did not report healthier behaviors more often than those without a family history. However, those with a family history were more likely to report a mammographic exam prior to the mammographic diagnosis. Our study suggests that having a family history of cancer is not sufficient to change women's behaviors about physical activity, weight control and diet, smoking, and drinking, but it seems to influence their breast cancer screening behavior. Our results suggest the need to increase women's information and/or understanding that healthier lifestyles contribute to cancer prevention.

Cumulative Risk Distribution for Interval Invasive Second Breast Cancers After Negative Surveillance Mammography

Purpose The aim of the current study was to characterize the risk of interval invasive second breast cancers within 5 years of primary breast cancer treatment. Methods We examined 65,084 surveillance mammograms from 18,366 women with a primary breast cancer diagnosis of unilateral ductal carcinoma in situ or stage I to III invasive breast carcinoma performed from 1996 to 2012 in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Interval invasive breast cancer was defined as ipsilateral or contralateral cancer diagnosed within 1 year after a negative surveillance mammogram. Discrete-time survival models-adjusted for all covariates-were used to estimate the probability of interval invasive cancer, given the risk factors for each surveillance round, and aggregated across rounds to estimate the 5-year cumulative probability of interval invasive cancer. Results We observed 474 surveillance-detected cancers-334 invasive and 140 ductal carcinoma in situ-and 186 interval invasive cancers which yielded a cancer detection rate of 7.3 per 1,000 examinations (95% CI, 6.6 to 8.0) and an interval invasive cancer rate of 2.9 per 1,000 examinations (95% CI, 2.5 to 3.3). Median cumulative 5-year interval cancer risk was 1.4% (interquartile range, 0.8% to 2.3%; 10th to 90th percentile range, 0.5% to 3.7%), and 15% of women had ≥ 3% 5-year interval invasive cancer risk. Cumulative 5-year interval cancer risk was highest for women with estrogen receptor- and progesterone receptor-negative primary breast cancer (2.6%; 95% CI, 1.7% to 3.5%), interval cancer presentation at primary diagnosis (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.5% to 2.9%), and breast conservation without radiation (1.8%; 95% CI, 1.1% to 2.4%). Conclusion Risk of interval invasive second breast cancer varies across women and is influenced by characteristics that can be measured at initial diagnosis, treatment, and imaging. Risk prediction models that evaluate the risk of cancers not detected by surveillance mammography should be developed to inform discussions of tailored surveillance.

Cumulative risk of breast cancer screening outcomes according to the presence of previous benign breast disease and family history of breast cancer: supporting personalised screening

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to assess the cumulative risk of false-positive screening results, screen-detected cancer, and interval breast cancer in mammography screening among women with and without a previous benign breast disease and a family history of breast cancer.

METHODS

The cohort included 42 928 women first screened at the age of 50-51 years at three areas of the Spanish Screening Programme (Girona, and two areas in Barcelona) between 1996 and 2011, and followed up until December 2012. We used discrete-time survival models to estimate the cumulative risk of each screening outcome over 10 biennial screening exams.

RESULTS

The cumulative risk of false-positive results, screen-detected breast cancer, and interval cancer was 36.6, 5.3, and 1.4 for women with a previous benign breast disease, 24.1, 6.8, and 1.6% for women with a family history of breast cancer, 37.9, 9.0, and 3.2%; for women with both a previous benign breast disease and a family history, and 23.1, 3.2, and 0.9% for women without either of these antecedents, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with a benign breast disease or a family history of breast cancer had an increased cumulative risk of favourable and unfavourable screening outcomes than women without these characteristics. A family history of breast cancer did not increase the cumulative risk of false-positive results. Identifying different risk profiles among screening participants provides useful information to stratify women according to their individualised risk when personalised screening strategies are discussed.