Health inequities in mammography: A scoping review

Multi-cancer early detection tests for general population screening: a systematic literature review

Background

General population cancer screening in the United Kingdom is limited to selected cancers. Blood-based multi-cancer early detection tests aim to detect potential cancer signals from multiple cancers in the blood. The use of a multi-cancer early detection test for population screening requires a high specificity and a reasonable sensitivity to detect early-stage disease so that the benefits of earlier diagnosis and treatment can be realised.

Objective

To undertake a systematic literature review of the clinical effectiveness evidence on blood-based multi-cancer early detection tests for screening.

Methods

Comprehensive searches of electronic databases (including MEDLINE and EMBASE) and trial registers were undertaken in September 2023 to identify published and unpublished studies of multi-cancer early detection tests. Test manufacturer websites and reference lists of included studies and pertinent reviews were checked for additional studies. The target population was individuals aged 50-79 years without clinical suspicion of cancer. Outcomes of interest included test accuracy, number and proportion of cancers detected (by site and stage), time to diagnostic resolution, mortality, potential harms, health-related quality of life, acceptability and satisfaction. The risk of bias was assessed using the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies-2 checklist. Results were summarised using narrative synthesis. Stakeholders contributed to protocol development, report drafting and interpretation of review findings.

Results

Over 8000 records were identified. Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria: 1 ongoing randomised controlled trial, 13 completed cohort studies, 17 completed case-control studies and 5 ongoing cohort or case-control studies. Individual tests claimed to detect from 3 to over 50 different types of cancer. Diagnostic accuracy of currently available multi-cancer early detection tests varied substantially: Galleri® (GRAIL, Menlo Park, CA, USA) sensitivity 20.8-66.3%, specificity 98.4-99.5% (three studies); CancerSEEK (Exact Sciences, Madison, WI, USA) sensitivity 27.1-62.3%, specificity 98.9- 99.1% (two studies); SPOT-MAS™ (Gene Solutions, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam) sensitivity 72.4-100%, specificity 97.0-99.9% (two studies); Trucheck™ (Datar Cancer Genetics, Bayreuth, Germany) sensitivity 90.0%, specificity 96.4% (one study); Cancer Differentiation Analysis (AnPac Bio, Shanghai, China) sensitivity 40.0%, specificity 97.6% (one study). AICS® (AminoIndex Cancer Screening; Ajinomoto, Tokyo, Japan) screens for individual cancers separately, so no overall test performance statistics are available. Where reported, sensitivity was lower for detecting earlier-stage cancers (stages I-II) compared with later-stage cancers (stages III-IV). Studies of seven other multi-cancer early detection tests at an unclear stage of development were also summarised.

Limitations

Study selection was complex; it was often difficult to determine the stage of development of multi-cancer early detection tests. The evidence was limited; there were no completed randomised controlled trials and most included studies had a high overall risk of bias, primarily owing to limited follow-up of participants with negative test results. Only one study of Galleri recruited asymptomatic individuals aged over 50 in the United States of America; however, study results may not be representative of the United Kingdom's general screening population. No meaningful results were reported relating to patient-relevant outcomes, such as mortality, potential harms, health-related quality of life, acceptability or satisfaction.

Conclusions

All currently available multi-cancer early-detection tests reported high specificity (> 96%). Sensitivity was highly variable and influenced by study design, population, reference standard test used and length of follow-up.

Future work

Further research should report patient-relevant outcomes and consider patient and service impacts.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42023467901.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR161758) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 29, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Paving the way for Alzheimer's disease blood-based biomarkers in primary care

Blood-based biomarkers (BBBMs) for Alzheimer's disease (AD) have the potential to revolutionize the detection and management of cognitive impairment. AD BBBMs are not currently recommended for use in primary care but may soon be as research demonstrates their clinical utility for differential diagnosis and patient management. To prepare for the incorporation of AD BBBMs into primary care, several practical challenges must be addressed. Here, we describe four immediate challenges: (1) preparing primary care providers to order and disclose AD BBBMs, (2) expanding the dementia-capable workforce, (3) ensuring equitable uptake of AD BBBM testing, and (4) securing access to AD treatment. We conclude by discussing future directions and challenges for use of AD BBBMs in primary care, including screening for preclinical AD and dementia detection algorithms. HIGHLIGHTS: Alzheimer's disease (AD) blood-based biomarkers (BBBMs) may be well suited for primary care. Many changes are needed to prepare the workforce and ensure patient access. Paving the way for AD BBBMs in primary care will require a multi-pronged approach.

Breast and Cervical Cancer Screenings: A Systematic Economic Review of Patient Navigation Services

INTRODUCTION

This paper examined the economic evidence of patient navigation services to increase breast and cervical cancer screenings among historically disadvantaged racial and ethnic populations and people with lower incomes.

METHODS

The literature search strategy for this systematic review included English-language studies conducted in high-income countries that were published from database inception to December 2022. Studies on patients with existing cancer or without healthcare system involvement were excluded. Analysis was completed in January 2023. All monetary values reported are in 2022 U.S. dollars.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3 breast cancer, 2 cervical cancer, and 2 multiple cancer studies that combined breast and cervical cancer with other cancer screenings. For breast cancer screening, the intervention cost per person ranged from $109 to $10,245. Two studies reported $154 and $740 as intervention cost per additional person screened. Changes in healthcare cost per person from 2 studies were $202 and $2,437. Two studies reported cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of $3,852 and $39,159 while one study reported cost per life year (LY) gained of $22,889. For cervical cancer, 2 studies reported intervention cost per person ($103 and $794) and per additional person screened ($56 and $533) with one study reporting a cost per QALY gained ($924).

DISCUSSION

All estimates of cost per QALY/LY saved for breast cancer screening were below a conservative threshold of $50,000 indicating that patient navigation services for breast cancer screening were cost-effective. There is limited evidence to determine cost-effectiveness of patient navigation services for cervical cancer screening.

Raising Cultural Awareness and Addressing Barriers to Breast Imaging Care for Black Women

Health care disparities, which are differences in the attainment of full health potential among population groups, have been documented across medical conditions, clinical settings, and diagnostic and treatment modalities. Deeply rooted health care disparities due to many factors have affected how Black women (BW) view medical care including screening mammography. This article explores health care disparities around breast cancer in BW and how patient distrust, provider biases, race, and social determinants of health continue to have negative effects on breast cancer outcomes in BW, despite medical advances in breast cancer detection and management. In addition, this article addresses the importance of culturally competent care for BW around breast cancer awareness, screening, and treatment, and offers strategies to address disparities and rebuild trust.

Rural racial disparities and barriers in mammography utilization among Medicare beneficiaries in Texas: A longitudinal study

This study examined rural racial/ethnic disparities in long-term mammography screening practices among Medicare beneficiaries. A retrospective longitudinal study was conducted using 100% Texas Medicare data for women aged 65-74 who enrolled in Medicare between 2010-2013. Of the 114,939 eligible women, 21.2% of Hispanics, 33.3% of non-Hispanic Blacks (NHB), and 38.4% non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) in rural areas were regular users of mammography, compared to 33.5%, 44.9%, and 45.3% of their counterparts in urban areas, respectively. Stratification analyses showed rural Hispanics and NHB were 33% (95% CI, 25% - 40%) and 22% (95% CI, 6% - 36%) less likely to be regular users of mammography compared to their urban counterparts. Major barriers to routine mammography screening included the lack of a primary care provider, frequent hospitalization, and comorbidity. The findings of this study highlight the importance of addressing rural racial disparities in mammography utilization among older women to ensure equitable screening practices for all populations.

Strategies enhancing the patient experience in mammography: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

A positive experience in mammography is essential for increasing patient attendance and reattendance at these examinations, whether conducted for diagnostic or screening purposes. Mammograms indeed facilitate early disease detection, enhance the potential for cure, and consequently reduce breast cancer mortality. The main objective of this review was to identify and map the strategies aiming to improve the patient experience in diagnostic and screening mammography.

METHODS

This scoping review was performed following the JBI methodology and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). Searches were performed through databases of MEDLINE, Embase.com, CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, and three clinical trial registries. This review considered studies evaluating the effect of interventions, occurring within the mammography department, on the patient experience.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 8113 citations of which 60, matching the inclusion criteria, were included. The strategies were classified into eight categories. The most represented one was breast compression and positioning, followed by relaxation techniques and analgesic care, communication and information, screening equipment, examination procedures, patient-related factors, physical environment, and finally staff characteristics. The studied outcomes related to patient experience were mainly pain, anxiety, comfort, and satisfaction. Other types of outcomes were also considered in the studies such as image quality, technical parameters, or radiation dose. Most studies were conducted by radiographers, on female patients, and none mentioned the inclusion of male or transgender patients.

CONCLUSION

This review outlined a diversity of strategies to improve patient experience, although technique-based interventions were predominant. Further research is warranted, notably on psychological strategies, and on men and transgender people.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

This scoping review provides guidance to healthcare providers and services for better patient/client-centered care.