1
|
Patient-reported financial toxicity, quality of life, and health behaviors in insured US cancer survivors. Support Care Cancer 2020; 29:349-358. [DOI: 10.1007/s00520-020-05468-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2019] [Accepted: 04/13/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
2
|
Lipscomb J, Escoffery C, Gillespie TW, Henley SJ, Smith RA, Chociemski T, Almon L, Jiang R, Sheng X, Goodman M, Ward KC. Improving Screening Uptake among Breast Cancer Survivors and Their First-Degree Relatives at Elevated Risk to Breast Cancer: Results and Implications of a Randomized Study in the State of Georgia. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2020; 17:ijerph17030977. [PMID: 32033227 PMCID: PMC7037204 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17030977] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/18/2019] [Revised: 01/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/24/2020] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
Women diagnosed with breast cancer at a relatively early age (≤45 years) or with bilateral disease at any age are at elevated risk for additional breast cancer, as are their female first-degree relatives (FDRs). We report on a randomized trial to increase adherence to mammography screening guidelines among survivors and FDRs. From the Georgia Cancer Registry, breast cancer survivors diagnosed during 2000–2009 at six Georgia cancer centers underwent phone interviews about their breast cancer screening behaviors and their FDRs. Nonadherent survivors and FDRs meeting all inclusion criteria were randomized to high-intensity (evidence-based brochure, phone counseling, mailed reminders, and communications with primary care providers) or low-intensity interventions (brochure only). Three and 12-month follow-up questionnaires were completed. Data analyses used standard statistical approaches. Among 1055 survivors and 287 FDRs who were located, contacted, and agreed to participate, 59.5% and 62.7%, respectively, reported breast cancer screening in the past 12 months and were thus ineligible. For survivors enrolled at baseline (N = 95), the proportion reporting adherence to guideline screening by 12 months post-enrollment was similar in the high and low-intensity arms (66.7% vs. 79.2%, p = 0.31). Among FDRs enrolled at baseline (N = 83), screening was significantly higher in the high-intensity arm at 12 months (60.9% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.03). Overall, about 72% of study-eligible survivors (all of whom were screening nonadherent at baseline) reported screening within 12 months of study enrollment. For enrolled FDRs receiving the high-intensity intervention, over 60% reported guideline screening by 12 months. A major conclusion is that using high-quality central cancer registries to identify high-risk breast cancer survivors and then working closely with these survivors to identify their FDRs represents a feasible and effective strategy to promote guideline cancer screening.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joseph Lipscomb
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +404-727-4513; Fax: +404-727-9198
| | - Cam Escoffery
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA;
| | - Theresa W. Gillespie
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA;
- Department of Surgery and Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
| | - S. Jane Henley
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Atlanta, GA 30341, USA;
| | - Robert A. Smith
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
- Cancer Control Program, American Cancer Society; Atlanta, GA 30303, USA
| | - Toni Chociemski
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
| | - Lyn Almon
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
| | - Renjian Jiang
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
| | - Xi Sheng
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
| | - Michael Goodman
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA;
| | - Kevin C. Ward
- Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA; (C.E.); (R.A.S.); (T.C.); (L.A.); (R.J.); (X.S.); (M.G.); (K.C.W.)
- Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University; Atlanta, GA 30322, USA;
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Millar MM, Elena JW, Gallicchio L, Edwards SL, Carter ME, Herget KA, Sweeney C. The feasibility of web surveys for obtaining patient-reported outcomes from cancer survivors: a randomized experiment comparing survey modes and brochure enclosures. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019; 19:208. [PMID: 31730474 PMCID: PMC6858678 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 10/23/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Central cancer registries are often used to survey population-based samples of cancer survivors. These surveys are typically administered via paper or telephone. In most populations, web surveys obtain much lower response rates than paper surveys. This study assessed the feasibility of web surveys for collecting patient-reported outcomes via a central cancer registry. Methods Potential participants were sampled from Utah Cancer Registry records. Sample members were randomly assigned to receive a web or paper survey, and then randomized to either receive or not receive an informative brochure describing the cancer registry. We calculated adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare response likelihood and the demographic profile of respondents across study arms. Results The web survey response rate (43.2%) was lower than the paper survey (50.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (adjusted risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.72, 1.07). The brochure also did not significantly influence the proportion responding (adjusted risk ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.25). There were few differences in the demographic profiles of respondents across the survey modes. Older age increased likelihood of response to a paper questionnaire but not a web questionnaire. Conclusions Web surveys of cancer survivors are feasible without significantly influencing response rates, but providing a paper response option may be advisable particularly when surveying older individuals. Further examination of the varying effects of brochure enclosures across different survey modes is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. .,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.
| | - Joanne W Elena
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Lisa Gallicchio
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Kimberly A Herget
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.,Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Cir of Hope Dr. Salt, Lake City, UT, 84112, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Millar MM, Elena JW, Gallicchio L, Edwards SL, Carter ME, Herget KA, Sweeney C. The feasibility of web surveys for obtaining patient-reported outcomes from cancer survivors: a randomized experiment comparing survey modes and brochure enclosures. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019. [PMID: 31730474 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9:10.1186/s12874-019-0859-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Central cancer registries are often used to survey population-based samples of cancer survivors. These surveys are typically administered via paper or telephone. In most populations, web surveys obtain much lower response rates than paper surveys. This study assessed the feasibility of web surveys for collecting patient-reported outcomes via a central cancer registry. METHODS Potential participants were sampled from Utah Cancer Registry records. Sample members were randomly assigned to receive a web or paper survey, and then randomized to either receive or not receive an informative brochure describing the cancer registry. We calculated adjusted risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals to compare response likelihood and the demographic profile of respondents across study arms. RESULTS The web survey response rate (43.2%) was lower than the paper survey (50.4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (adjusted risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.72, 1.07). The brochure also did not significantly influence the proportion responding (adjusted risk ratio = 1.03, 95% confidence interval = 0.85, 1.25). There were few differences in the demographic profiles of respondents across the survey modes. Older age increased likelihood of response to a paper questionnaire but not a web questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS Web surveys of cancer survivors are feasible without significantly influencing response rates, but providing a paper response option may be advisable particularly when surveying older individuals. Further examination of the varying effects of brochure enclosures across different survey modes is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA. .,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.
| | - Joanne W Elena
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Lisa Gallicchio
- Epidemiology and Genomics Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 9609 Medical Center Drive, Rockville, MD, 20852, USA
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Kimberly A Herget
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Department of Internal Medicine, 295 Chipeta Way University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 84132, USA.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah, 250 E 200 S, Suite 1375, Salt Lake City, UT, 84111, USA.,Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 2000 Cir of Hope Dr. Salt, Lake City, UT, 84112, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Millar MM, Kinney AY, Camp NJ, Cannon-Albright LA, Hashibe M, Penson DF, Kirchhoff AC, Neklason DW, Gilsenan AW, Dieck GS, Stroup AM, Edwards SL, Bateman C, Carter ME, Sweeney C. Predictors of Response Outcomes for Research Recruitment Through a Central Cancer Registry: Evidence From 17 Recruitment Efforts for Population-Based Studies. Am J Epidemiol 2019. [PMID: 30689685 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwz011:10.1093/aje/kwz011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
When recruiting research participants through central cancer registries, high response fractions help ensure population-based representation. We conducted multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to identify case and study characteristics associated with making contact with and obtaining cooperation of Utah cancer cases using data from 17 unique recruitment efforts undertaken by the Utah Cancer Registry (2007-2016) on behalf of the following studies: A Population-Based Childhood Cancer Survivors Cohort Study in Utah, Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation for Prostate Cancer (CEASAR Study), Costs and Benefits of Follow-up Care for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancers, Study of Exome Sequencing for Head and Neck Cancer Susceptibility Genes, Genetic Epidemiology of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Impact of Remote Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling (Family CARE Project), Massively Parallel Sequencing for Familial Colon Cancer Genes, Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) Surveillance Study, Osteosarcoma Surveillance Study, Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study, Risk Education and Assessment for Cancer Heredity Project (REACH Project), Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis and Tumor Subtyping in High-Risk Breast-Cancer Gene Pedigrees, Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis for Localizing Multiple Myeloma Genes. Characteristics associated with lower odds of contact included Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio (OR) = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 0.41), nonwhite race (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.60), and younger age at contact. Years since diagnosis was inversely associated with making contact. Nonwhite race and age ≥60 years had lower odds of cooperation. Study features with lower odds of cooperation included longitudinal design (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.61) and study brochures (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.90). Increased odds of cooperation were associated with including a questionnaire (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.54, 6.59), postage stamps (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.12), and incentives (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.57). Among cases not responding after the first contact, odds of eventual response were lower when >10 days elapsed before subsequent contact (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.85). Obtaining high response is challenging, but study features identified in this analysis support better results when recruiting through central cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Nicola J Camp
- Division of Hematology and Hematological Malignancies, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Lisa A Cannon-Albright
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Mia Hashibe
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - David F Penson
- Urologic Surgery, Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee.,Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Anne C Kirchhoff
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Division of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Deborah W Neklason
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Alicia W Gilsenan
- Department of Epidemiology, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
| | - Gretchen S Dieck
- Safety, Epidemiology, and Risk Management, United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey.,New Jersey State Cancer Registry, New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carrie Bateman
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.,Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Millar MM, Kinney AY, Camp NJ, Cannon-Albright LA, Hashibe M, Penson DF, Kirchhoff AC, Neklason DW, Gilsenan AW, Dieck GS, Stroup AM, Edwards SL, Bateman C, Carter ME, Sweeney C. Predictors of Response Outcomes for Research Recruitment Through a Central Cancer Registry: Evidence From 17 Recruitment Efforts for Population-Based Studies. Am J Epidemiol 2019; 188:928-939. [PMID: 30689685 DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwz011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/29/2018] [Revised: 01/09/2019] [Accepted: 01/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
When recruiting research participants through central cancer registries, high response fractions help ensure population-based representation. We conducted multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression to identify case and study characteristics associated with making contact with and obtaining cooperation of Utah cancer cases using data from 17 unique recruitment efforts undertaken by the Utah Cancer Registry (2007-2016) on behalf of the following studies: A Population-Based Childhood Cancer Survivors Cohort Study in Utah, Comparative Effectiveness Analysis of Surgery and Radiation for Prostate Cancer (CEASAR Study), Costs and Benefits of Follow-up Care for Adolescent and Young Adult Cancers, Study of Exome Sequencing for Head and Neck Cancer Susceptibility Genes, Genetic Epidemiology of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Impact of Remote Familial Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment and Counseling (Family CARE Project), Massively Parallel Sequencing for Familial Colon Cancer Genes, Medullary Thyroid Carcinoma (MTC) Surveillance Study, Osteosarcoma Surveillance Study, Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study, Risk Education and Assessment for Cancer Heredity Project (REACH Project), Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis and Tumor Subtyping in High-Risk Breast-Cancer Gene Pedigrees, Study of Shared Genomic Segment Analysis for Localizing Multiple Myeloma Genes. Characteristics associated with lower odds of contact included Hispanic ethnicity (odds ratio (OR) = 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.27, 0.41), nonwhite race (OR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.60), and younger age at contact. Years since diagnosis was inversely associated with making contact. Nonwhite race and age ≥60 years had lower odds of cooperation. Study features with lower odds of cooperation included longitudinal design (OR = 0.50, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.61) and study brochures (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.54, 0.90). Increased odds of cooperation were associated with including a questionnaire (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.54, 6.59), postage stamps (OR = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.21, 2.12), and incentives (OR = 1.62, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.57). Among cases not responding after the first contact, odds of eventual response were lower when >10 days elapsed before subsequent contact (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.85). Obtaining high response is challenging, but study features identified in this analysis support better results when recruiting through central cancer registries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morgan M Millar
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
| | - Nicola J Camp
- Division of Hematology and Hematological Malignancies, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Lisa A Cannon-Albright
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Mia Hashibe
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Division of Public Health, Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - David F Penson
- Urologic Surgery, Department of Urology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
- Center for Surgical Quality and Outcomes Research, Vanderbilt Institute for Medicine and Public Health, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee
| | - Anne C Kirchhoff
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Division of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology, Department of Pediatrics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Deborah W Neklason
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Alicia W Gilsenan
- Department of Epidemiology, RTI Health Solutions, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
| | - Gretchen S Dieck
- Safety, Epidemiology, and Risk Management, United BioSource Corporation, Blue Bell, Pennsylvania
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- Division of Cancer Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey
- New Jersey State Cancer Registry, New Jersey Department of Health, Trenton, New Jersey
| | - Sandra L Edwards
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carrie Bateman
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Marjorie E Carter
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Carol Sweeney
- Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Utah Cancer Registry, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
- Cancer Control and Population Sciences Program, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah Health, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kinney AY, Howell R, Ruckman R, McDougall JA, Boyce TW, Vicuña B, Lee JH, Guest DD, Rycroft R, Valverde PA, Gallegos KM, Meisner A, Wiggins CL, Stroup A, Paddock LE, Walters ST. Promoting guideline-based cancer genetic risk assessment for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in ethnically and geographically diverse cancer survivors: Rationale and design of a 3-arm randomized controlled trial. Contemp Clin Trials 2018; 73:123-135. [PMID: 30236776 PMCID: PMC6214814 DOI: 10.1016/j.cct.2018.09.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/27/2018] [Revised: 09/06/2018] [Accepted: 09/08/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although national guidelines for cancer genetic risk assessment (CGRA) for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have been available for over two decades, less than half of high-risk women have accessed these services, especially underserved minority and rural populations. Identification of high-risk individuals is crucial for cancer survivors and their families to benefit from biomedical advances in cancer prevention, early detection, and treatment. METHODS This paper describes community-engaged formative research and the protocol of the ongoing randomized 3-arm controlled Genetic Risk Assessment for Cancer Education and Empowerment (GRACE) trial. Ethnically and geographically diverse breast and ovarian cancer survivors at increased risk for hereditary cancer predisposition who have not had a CGRA are recruited through the three statewide cancer registries. The specific aims are to: 1) compare the effectiveness of a targeted intervention (TP) vs. a tailored counseling and navigation(TCN) intervention vs. usual care (UC) on CGRA utilization at 6 months post-diagnosis (primary outcome); compare the effectiveness of the interventions on genetic counseling uptake at 12 months after removal of cost barriers (secondary outcome); 2) examine potential underlying theoretical mediating and moderating mechanisms; and 3) conduct a cost evaluation to guide dissemination strategies. DISCUSSION The ongoing GRACE trial addresses an important translational gap by developing and implementing evidence-based strategies to promote guideline-based care and reduce disparities in CGRA utilization among ethnically and geographically diverse women. If effective, these interventions have the potential to reach a large number of high-risk families and reduce disparities through broad dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT03326713; clinicaltrials.gov.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Y Kinney
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey.
| | - Rachel Howell
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Rachel Ruckman
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Jean A McDougall
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Tawny W Boyce
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Belinda Vicuña
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Ji-Hyun Lee
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Dolores D Guest
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Randi Rycroft
- Colorado Central Cancer Registry, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Denver, CO, United States
| | - Patricia A Valverde
- Colorado School of Public Health, University of Colorado, Aurora, CO, United States
| | | | - Angela Meisner
- New Mexico Tumor Registry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Charles L Wiggins
- Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico; New Mexico Tumor Registry, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, Mexico
| | - Antoinette Stroup
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey
| | - Lisa E Paddock
- Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey; Cancer Institute of New Jersey, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, Jersey
| | - Scott T Walters
- Department of Health Behavior and Health Systems, University of North Texas Health Science Center, School of Public Health, Fort Worth, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bluethmann SM, Murphy CC, Tiro JA, Mollica MA, Vernon SW, Bartholomew LK. Deconstructing Decisions to Initiate, Maintain, or Discontinue Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Mixed-Methods Study. Oncol Nurs Forum 2018. [PMID: 28635973 DOI: 10.1188/17.onf.e101-e110] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) has been shown to improve survival in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer survivors, but as many as half do not complete recommended treatment. Management of medication-related side effects and engagement with providers are two potentially modifiable factors, but their associations with adherence are not well understood. The aims were to build on survey results to qualitatively explore survivors' experiences with prescribed AET to (a) describe appraisal and management of AET side effects and (b) deconstruct decisions to initiate, discontinue, or maintain AET.
. RESEARCH APPROACH The authors used a mixed-methods explanatory sequence research design with a qualitative emphasis.
. SETTING Survivors were recruited from a clinical cancer registry maintained at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, which includes the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center (National Cancer Institute-designated), in Dallas.
. PARTICIPANTS 452 survivors completed a survey, and 30 took part in telephone interviews.
. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH Qualitative methods were used in which the authors recorded and transcribed interviews for analysis and used open coding to reduce data into themes.
. FINDINGS Among adherent survivors, the themes of tolerance of side effects and perseverance were strong. Nonadherent survivors expressed more difficulty managing side effects and perceived fewer benefits when side effects were bothersome. The most common side effects mentioned by all survivors were menopausal symptoms and joint pain; less common side effects were cognitive decline and cardiac distress. Some sought advice from their oncology team. Nonadherent survivors appeared initially motivated to maintain AET but identified a tolerance limit for side effects after which a provider's recommendation was less influential in their decision to maintain or discontinue AET.
. INTERPRETATION This study elucidated adherence as a complex continuum of behaviors, appraisals, and decision points. These insights may be particularly useful in counseling survivors taking AET and promoting timely delivery of clinical interventions to enhance adherence.
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING Nurses should be involved in the planning and implementation of clinical interventions to manage side effects and other barriers to AET adherence.
Collapse
|
9
|
Siegel DA, Henley SJ, Wike JM, Ryerson AB, Johnson CJ, Rees JR, Pollack LA. Capture of tobacco use among population-based registries: Findings from 10 National Program of Cancer Registries states. Cancer 2018; 124:2381-2389. [PMID: 29579317 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2017] [Revised: 01/23/2018] [Accepted: 02/10/2018] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Tobacco use data are important when the epidemiology and prognosis of tobacco-associated cancers are being defined. Central cancer registries in 10 National Program of Cancer Registries states pilot-tested the collection of standardized tobacco use variables. This study evaluated the capture of tobacco use data and examined smoking prevalence among cancer patients. METHODS Participating registries collected data about the use of tobacco-cigarettes, other smoked tobacco, and smokeless tobacco-for cases diagnosed during 2011-2013. The percentage of cases with known tobacco variable values was calculated, and the prevalence of tobacco use was analyzed by the primary cancer site and state. RESULTS Among 1,646,505 incident cancer cases, 51% had known cigarette use data: 18% were current users, 31% were former users, and 51% reported never using. The percentage of cases with a known status for both other smoked tobacco and smokeless tobacco was 43%, with 97% and 98% coded as never users, respectively. The percent known for cigarette use ranged from 27% to 81% by state and improved from 47% in 2011 to 59% in 2013 for all 10 states combined. The percent known for cigarette use and the prevalence of ever smoking cigarettes were highest for laryngeal cancer and tracheal, lung, and bronchus cancer. CONCLUSIONS Cancer registrars ascertained cigarette use for slightly more than half of all new cancer cases, but other tobacco-related fields were less complete. Studies to evaluate the validity of specific tobacco-related variables and the ability of cancer registries to capture this information from the medical record are needed to gauge the usefulness of collecting these variables through cancer surveillance systems. Cancer 2018;124:2381-9. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David A Siegel
- Epidemic Intelligence Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.,Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - S Jane Henley
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - Jennifer M Wike
- DB Consulting Group, Inc, CDC-NPCR Contractor, Atlanta, Georgia
| | - A Blythe Ryerson
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | | - Judy R Rees
- New Hampshire State Cancer Registry, Lebanon, New Hampshire.,Department of Epidemiology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, New Hampshire
| | - Lori A Pollack
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Katapodi MC, Duquette D, Yang JJ, Mendelsohn-Victor K, Anderson B, Nikolaidis C, Mancewicz E, Northouse LL, Duffy S, Ronis D, Milliron KJ, Probst-Herbst N, Merajver SD, Janz NK, Copeland G, Roberts S. Recruiting families at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer from a statewide cancer registry: a methodological study. Cancer Causes Control 2017; 28:191-201. [PMID: 28197806 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-017-0858-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2016] [Accepted: 01/25/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Cancer genetic services (counseling/testing) are recommended for women diagnosed with breast cancer younger than 45 years old (young breast cancer survivors-YBCS) and at-risk relatives. We present recruitment of YBCS, identification and recruitment of at-risk relatives, and YBCS willingness to contact their cancer-free, female relatives. METHODS A random sample of 3,000 YBCS, stratified by race (Black vs. White/Other), was identified through a population-based cancer registry and recruited in a randomized trial designed to increase use of cancer genetic services. Baseline demographic, clinical, and family characteristics, and variables associated with the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) were assessed as predictors of YBCS' willingness to contact at-risk relatives. RESULTS The 883 YBCS (33.2% response rate; 40% Black) who returned a survey had 1,875 at-risk relatives and were willing to contact 1,360 (72.5%). From 853 invited at-risk relatives (up to two relatives per YBCS), 442 responded (51.6% response rate). YBCS with larger families, with a previous diagnosis of depression, and motivated to comply with recommendations from family members were likely to contact a greater number of relatives. Black YBCS were more likely to contact younger relatives and those living further than 50 miles compared to White/Other YBCS. CONCLUSION It is feasible to recruit diverse families at risk for hereditary cancer from a population-based cancer registry. This recruitment approach can be used as a paradigm for harmonizing processes and increasing internal and external validity of large-scale public health genomic initiatives in the era of precision medicine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria C Katapodi
- Nursing Science, Faculty of Medicine, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland. .,University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
| | - Deb Duquette
- Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, 333 S. Grand Ave., P.O. Box 30195, Lansing, MI, 48909, USA
| | - James J Yang
- University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Kari Mendelsohn-Victor
- University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Beth Anderson
- Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, 333 S. Grand Ave., P.O. Box 30195, Lansing, MI, 48909, USA
| | - Christos Nikolaidis
- Nursing Science, Faculty of Medicine, Bernoullistrasse 28, 4056, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Emily Mancewicz
- University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Laurel L Northouse
- University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Sonia Duffy
- Ohio State University College of Nursing, 1585 Neil Ave, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - David Ronis
- University of Michigan School of Nursing, 400 North Ingalls Building, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Kara J Milliron
- University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, CCGC 6-303, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-0944, USA
| | - Nicole Probst-Herbst
- Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, University of Basel, Socinstrasse 57, 4051, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Sofia D Merajver
- University of Michigan, School of Medicine, 1500 E Medical Center Dr, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Nancy K Janz
- University of Michigan, School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| | - Glenn Copeland
- Michigan Cancer Surveillance Program, 333 S. Grand Ave, P.O. Box 30195, Lansing, MI, 48909, USA
| | - Scott Roberts
- University of Michigan, School of Public Health, 1415 Washington Heights, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kinney AY, Steffen LE, Brumbach BH, Kohlmann W, Du R, Lee JH, Gammon A, Butler K, Buys SS, Stroup AM, Campo RA, Flores KG, Mandelblatt JS, Schwartz MD. Randomized Noninferiority Trial of Telephone Delivery of BRCA1/2 Genetic Counseling Compared With In-Person Counseling: 1-Year Follow-Up. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34:2914-24. [PMID: 27325848 PMCID: PMC5012661 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2015.65.9557] [Citation(s) in RCA: 91] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/07/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE The ongoing integration of cancer genomic testing into routine clinical care has led to increased demand for cancer genetic services. To meet this demand, there is an urgent need to enhance the accessibility and reach of such services, while ensuring comparable care delivery outcomes. This randomized trial compared 1-year outcomes for telephone genetic counseling with in-person counseling among women at risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer living in geographically diverse areas. PATIENTS AND METHODS Using population-based sampling, women at increased risk of hereditary breast and/or ovarian cancer were randomly assigned to in-person (n = 495) or telephone genetic counseling (n = 493). One-sided 97.5% CIs were used to estimate the noninferiority effects of telephone counseling on 1-year psychosocial, decision-making, and quality-of-life outcomes. Differences in test-uptake proportions for determining equivalency of a 10% prespecified margin were evaluated by 95% CIs. RESULTS At the 1-year follow-up, telephone counseling was noninferior to in-person counseling for all psychosocial and informed decision-making outcomes: anxiety (difference [d], 0.08; upper bound 97.5% CI, 0.45), cancer-specific distress (d, 0.66; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.28), perceived personal control (d, -0.01; lower bound 97.5% CI, -0.06), and decisional conflict (d, -0.12; upper bound 97.5% CI, 2.03). Test uptake was lower for telephone counseling (27.9%) than in-person counseling (37.3%), with the difference of 9.4% (95% CI, 2.2% to 16.8%). Uptake was appreciably higher for rural compared with urban dwellers in both counseling arms. CONCLUSION Although telephone counseling led to lower testing uptake, our findings suggest that telephone counseling can be effectively used to increase reach and access without long-term adverse psychosocial consequences. Further work is needed to determine long-term adherence to risk management guidelines and effective strategies to boost utilization of primary and secondary preventive strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anita Y Kinney
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
| | - Laurie E Steffen
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Barbara H Brumbach
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Wendy Kohlmann
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Ruofei Du
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Ji-Hyun Lee
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Amanda Gammon
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Karin Butler
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Saundra S Buys
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Antoinette M Stroup
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Rebecca A Campo
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Kristina G Flores
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Jeanne S Mandelblatt
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| | - Marc D Schwartz
- Anita Y. Kinney, Laurie E. Steffen, Barbara H. Brumbach, Ruofei Du, Ji-Hyun Lee, Karin Butler, and Kristina G. Flores, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM; Wendy Kohlmann, Amanda Gammon, and Saundra S. Buys, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT; Antoinette M. Stroup, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ; Rebecca A. Campo, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; and Jeanne S. Mandelblatt and Marc D. Schwartz, Georgetown University, Washington, DC
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Tiro JA, Sanders JM, Shay LA, Murphy CC, A Hamann H, Bartholomew LK, Savas LS, Vernon SW. Validation of self-reported post-treatment mammography surveillance among breast cancer survivors by electronic medical record extraction method. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2015; 151:427-34. [PMID: 25922083 DOI: 10.1007/s10549-015-3387-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2015] [Accepted: 04/11/2015] [Indexed: 12/01/2022]
Abstract
Little is known about validity of self-reported mammography surveillance among breast cancer survivors. Most studies have focused on accuracy among healthy, average-risk populations and none have assessed validity by electronic medical record (EMR) extraction method. To assess validity of survivor-reported mammography post-active treatment care, we surveyed all survivors diagnosed 2004-2009 in an academic hospital cancer registry (n = 1441). We used electronic query and manual review to extract EMR data. Concordance, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and report-to-records ratio were calculated by comparing survivors' self-reports to data from each extraction method. We also assessed average difference in months between mammography dates by source and correlates of concordance. Agreement between the two EMR extraction methods was high (concordance 0.90; kappa 0.70), with electronic query identifying more mammograms. Sensitivity was excellent (0.99) regardless of extraction method; concordance and positive predictive value were good; however, specificity was poor (manual review 0.20, electronic query 0.31). Report-to-records ratios were both over 1 suggesting over-reporting. We observed slight forward telescoping for survivors reporting mammograms 7-12 months prior to survey date. Higher educational attainment and less time since mammogram receipt were associated with greater concordance. Accuracy of survivors' self-reported mammograms was generally high with slight forward telescoping among those recalling their mammograms between 7 and 12 months prior to the survey date. Results are encouraging for clinicians and practitioners relying on survivor reports for surveillance care delivery and as a screening tool for inclusion in interventions promoting adherence to surveillance guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jasmin A Tiro
- Department of Clinical Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center and Harold C. Simmons Cancer Center, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390-9066, USA,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Hamann HA, Tiro JA, Sanders JM, Melhado TV, Funk RK, Carpentier MY, Bartholomew LK, Argenbright KE, Vernon SW. Validity of self-reported genetic counseling and genetic testing use among breast cancer survivors. J Cancer Surviv 2013; 7:624-9. [DOI: 10.1007/s11764-013-0301-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/17/2013] [Accepted: 07/08/2013] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|