Mammography screening after breast cancer diagnosis in a first degree female relative: age group differences (United States)

Do Subjective Norms Predict the Screening of Cancer Patients' First-Degree Relatives? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Early detection and preventive measures can reduce the risk of cancer among first degree relatives (FDRs) of cancer patients.Several studies investigated the effect of subjective norm in relation to FDRs' tendency to conduct preventive behaviors. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the effect of subjective norms on cancer patients' FDRs as well as their willingness for screening.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were studied to investigate the effect of subjective norms on preventive measures such as breast cancer self-examination, colonoscopy, PSA testing, skin examination, and genetic testing. Odds Ratio (OR), correlation was and confidence intervals were extracted for meta-analysis. After reviewing the studies, only 16 studies met the criteria to be included in this systematic review.

RESULTS

The meta- analysis and OR showed that Physician Recommendation (OR=6.98, 95% CI; 2.55-19.09, P<0.001), Health Care Provider (HCP) (OR=2.79, 95% CI; 1.26-6.16; P=0.011), family and friends (OR=1.82, 95% CI; 1.33-2.50, P <0.001) significantly enhanced the likelihood of referring for screening and preventive measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study indicated that subjective norms can significantly increase willingness to screening.

Personalized Mammography Screening and Screening Adherence-A Simulation and Economic Evaluation

OBJECTIVE

Personalized breast cancer screening has so far been economically evaluated under the assumption of full screening adherence. This is the first study to evaluate the effects of nonadherence on the evaluation and selection of personalized screening strategies.

METHODS

Different adherence scenarios were established on the basis of findings from the literature. A Markov microsimulation model was adapted to evaluate the effects of these adherence scenarios on three different personalized strategies.

RESULTS

First, three adherence scenarios describing the relationship between risk and adherence were identified: 1) a positive association between risk and screening adherence, 2) a negative association, or 3) a curvilinear relationship. Second, these three adherence scenarios were evaluated in three personalized strategies. Our results show that it is more the absolute adherence rate than the nature of the risk-adherence relationship that is important to determine which strategy is the most cost-effective. Furthermore, probabilistic sensitivity analyses showed that there are risk-stratified screening strategies that are more cost-effective than routine screening if the willingness-to-pay threshold for screening is below US $60,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that "nonadherence" affects the relative performance of screening strategies. Thus, it is necessary to include the true adherence level to evaluate personalized screening strategies and to select the best strategy.

Does perceived risk predict breast cancer screening use? Findings from a prospective cohort study of female relatives from the Ontario site of the breast cancer family registry

While the relationship between perceived risk and breast cancer screening use has been studied extensively, most studies are cross-sectional. We prospectively examined this relationship among 913 women, aged 25-72 with varying levels of familial breast cancer risk from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry. Associations between perceived lifetime breast cancer risk and subsequent use of mammography, clinical breast examination (CBE) and genetic testing were assessed using logistic regression. Overall, perceived risk did not predict subsequent use of mammography, CBE or genetic testing. Among women at moderate/high familial risk, those reporting a perceived risk greater than 50% were significantly less likely to have a CBE (odds ratio (OR) = 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.30-0.91, p = 0.04), and non-significantly less likely to have a mammogram (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.40-1.20, p = 0.70) or genetic test (OR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.34-1.10, p = 0.09) compared to women reporting a perceived risk of 50%. In contrast, among women at low familial risk, those reporting a perceived risk greater than 50% were non-significantly more likely to have a mammogram (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 0.59-2.16, p = 0.78), CBE (OR = 1.11, 95% CI: 0.63-1.95, p = 0.74) or genetic test (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.50-3.33, p = 0.35) compared to women reporting a perceived risk of 50%. Perceived risk did not significantly predict screening use overall, however this relationship may be moderated by level of familial risk. Results may inform risk education and management strategies for women with varying levels of familial breast cancer risk.

Perceived risk and adherence to breast cancer screening guidelines among women with a familial history of breast cancer: a review of the literature

OBJECTIVES

A small positive association has been consistently demonstrated between perceived breast cancer risk and mammography use. Evidence specific to women with familial breast cancer risk has not been previously reviewed.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted. 186 studies were identified for abstract/full-text review, of which 10 articles were included. Manual searching identified 10 additional articles. Twenty articles examining the association between perceived breast cancer risk and adherence to mammography, clinical breast examination (CBE) or breast self-examination (BSE) guidelines among women with familial breast cancer risk were reviewed. Studies were classified according to screening modality, categorized by finding and ordered by year of publication. Studies assessing mammography were further classified according to the applied method of measuring perceived risk.

RESULTS

Our review found a weak positive association between higher perceived risk and adherence to mammography guidelines among women with familial breast cancer risk. Consistent associations between perceived risk and adherence to CBE and BSE guidelines were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our ability to understand the relationship between perceived breast cancer risk and adherence to breast screening guidelines is limited, because most previous research is cross-sectional. Future studies with prospective methodologies that use consistent measurement methods and are adequately powered are warranted.

Nonrecommended breast and colorectal cancer screening for young women: a vignette-based survey

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prevalence of physicians offering nonrecommended breast or colorectal cancer screening for young women.

PURPOSE

The goal of the current paper was to examine the percentage of primary care physicians nationally who self-report offering breast or colorectal cancer screening tests for young women, and physician/practice characteristics associated with such recommendations.

METHODS

Analysis was performed in 2011 on data from a 2008 cross-sectional survey presenting a vignette of a health maintenance visit by an asymptomatic woman aged 35 years. This study included surveys sent to 1546 U.S. family physicians, general internists, and obstetrician-gynecologists aged <65 years, randomly selected from the AMA Physician Masterfile (60.6% response rate). Relevant respondent subsamples were used for the breast (n=505) and colorectal (n=721) cancer screening analyses. Responses were weighted to represent physicians nationally. The main outcome was physician self-report of offering breast or colorectal cancer screening tests.

RESULTS

75.3% (95% CI =71.0%, 79.2%) of physicians offered breast cancer screening tests; most commonly these physicians reported offering mammography alone (76.5%, 95% CI= 71.6%, 80.8%). A total of 39.3% (95% CI=35.5%, 43.2%) of physicians offered colorectal cancer screening tests; most commonly these physicians reported offering FOBT alone (43.3%, 95% CI=37.2%, 49.6%). In adjusted analysis, physician factors associated with offering breast and colorectal cancer screening tests were: estimating higher patient breast/colorectal cancer risk, and not listing the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force as a top influential organization.

CONCLUSIONS

A high percentage of physicians report offering nonrecommended breast or colorectal cancer screening tests for young women. Physicians' higher cancer-risk estimation accounted for some overscreening, but even physicians who estimated the patient to be at the same risk as the general population reported offering nonrecommended screening tests.

Are mammography recommendations in women younger than 40 related to increased risk?

Our objective was to examine the association between self-reported breast cancer risk factors and reported physician recommendations for mammography among women younger than 40. This study uses the 2005 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and includes 2,703 women ages 30-39 who reported having seen a doctor in the past 12 months. The NHIS is a population-based, cross-sectional survey of adult respondents in the United States. Overall, 19.0% of these women reported a recent mammography recommendation. Among women reporting no prior mammogram, women ages 30-34 with risk factors for breast cancer were more likely to report a recent mammogram recommendation than women without risk factors. There was no such association for women ages 35-39. Among women who reported a prior mammogram, risk factors were not associated with a recommendation for mammography; there was an association with age and recent clinical breast examination. Despite a lack of evidence-based guidelines for women under 40 years of age, these data suggest some younger women are being recommended for early mammography without indication. The relative benefits and harms of recommending mammography in this age group need further examination.

Racial and ethnic differences in mammography use among U.S. women younger than age 40

OBJECTIVE

Evidence-based recommendations for routine breast cancer screening suggest that women begin mammography at age 40, although some women receive a mammogram before that age. Little is known about mammography use among younger women, especially with respect to race and ethnicity.

METHODS

We used data from the 2005 National Health Interview Survey to examine racial/ethnic differences in mammography use among U.S. women ages 30-39. We examined descriptive characteristics of women who reported ever having a mammogram, and used logistic regression to estimate associations between race/ethnicity and mammography use among women at average risk for breast cancer.

RESULTS

Our sample comprised 3,098 women (18% Hispanic, 13% non-Hispanic [NH] black, 69% NH white), of whom 29% reported having ever had a mammogram. NH black women were more likely than NH white women to report ever having a mammogram and receiving multiple mammograms before age 40 among women of average risk. Patterns of mammography use for Hispanic women compared to NH white women varied.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest differential utilization of mammograms by race/ethnicity among women outside current recommendations and of average risk. Future studies should examine the role of practice patterns and patient-provider communication.