Breast Density Notification Letters and Websites: Are They Too "Dense"?

Screening mammography frequency following dense breast notification among a predominantly Hispanic/Latina screening cohort

PURPOSE

Nationally legislated dense breast notification (DBN) informs women of their breast density (BD) and the impact of BD on breast cancer risk and detection, but consequences for screening participation are unclear. We evaluated the association of DBN in New York State (NYS) with subsequent screening mammography in a largely Hispanic/Latina cohort.

METHODS

Women aged 40-60 were surveyed in their preferred language (33% English, 67% Spanish) during screening mammography from 2016 to 2018. We used clinical BD classification from mammography records from 2013 (NYS DBN enactment) through enrollment (baseline) to create a 6-category variable capturing prior and new DBN receipt (sent only after clinically dense mammograms). We used this variable to compare the number of subsequent mammograms (0, 1, ≥ 2) from 10 to 30 months after baseline using ordinal logistic regression.

RESULTS

In a sample of 728 women (78% foreign-born, 72% Hispanic, 46% high school education or less), first-time screeners and women who received DBN for the first time after prior non-dense mammograms had significantly fewer screening mammograms within 30 months of baseline (Odds Ratios range: 0.33 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.12-0.85) to 0.38 (95% CI 0.17-0.82)) compared to women with prior mammography but no DBN. There were no differences in subsequent mammogram frequency between women with multiple DBN and those who never received DBN. Findings were consistent across age, language, health literacy, and education groups.

CONCLUSION

Women receiving their first DBN after previous non-dense mammograms have lower mammography participation within 2.5 years. DBN has limited influence on screening participation of first-time screeners and those with persistent dense mammograms.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of English language online patient education materials in breast cancer: Is readability the only story?

BACKGROUND

Online patient education materials (OPEMs) are an increasingly popular resource for women seeking information about breast cancer. The AMA recommends written patient material to be at or below a 6th grade level to meet the general public's health literacy. Metrics such as quality, understandability, and actionability also heavily influence the usability of health information, and thus should be evaluated alongside readability.

PURPOSE

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to determine: 1) Average readability scores and reporting methodologies of breast cancer readability studies; and 2) Inclusion frequency of additional health literacy-associated metrics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A registered systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase.com, CENTRAL via Ovid, and ClinicalTrials.gov in June 2022 in adherence with the PRISMA 2020 statement. Eligible studies performed readability analyses on English-language breast cancer-related OPEMs. Study characteristics, readability data, and reporting of non-readability health literacy metrics were extracted. Meta-analysis estimates were derived from generalized linear mixed modeling.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 30 studies yielding 4462 OPEMs. Overall, average readability was 11.81 (95% CI [11.14, 12.49]), with a significant difference (p < 0.001) when grouped by OPEM categories. Commercial organizations had the highest average readability at 12.2 [11.3,13.0]; non-profit organizations had one of the lowest at 11.3 [10.6,12.0]. Readability also varied by index, with New Fog, Lexile, and FORCAST having the lowest average scores (9.4 [8.6, 10.3], 10.4 [10.0, 10.8], and 10.7 [10.2, 11.1], respectively). Only 57% of studies calculated average readability with more than two indices. Only 60% of studies assessed other OPEM metrics associated with health literacy.

CONCLUSION

Average readability of breast cancer OPEMs is nearly double the AMA's recommended 6th grade level. Readability and other health literacy-associated metrics are inconsistently reported in the current literature. Standardization of future readability studies, with a focus on holistic evaluation of patient materials, may aid shared decision-making and be critical to increased screening rates and breast cancer awareness.

Protocol for a pragmatic stepped wedge cluster randomized clinical trial testing behavioral economic implementation strategies to increase supplemental breast MRI screening among patients with extremely dense breasts

BACKGROUND

Increased breast density augments breast cancer risk and reduces mammography sensitivity. Supplemental breast MRI screening can significantly increase cancer detection among women with dense breasts. However, few women undergo this exam, and screening is consistently lower among racially minoritized populations. Implementation strategies informed by behavioral economics ("nudges") can promote evidence-based practices by improving clinician decision-making under conditions of uncertainty. Nudges directed toward clinicians and patients may facilitate the implementation of supplemental breast MRI.

METHODS

Approximately 1600 patients identified as having extremely dense breasts after non-actionable mammograms, along with about 1100 clinicians involved with their care at 32 primary care or OB/GYN clinics across a racially diverse academically based health system, will be enrolled. A 2 × 2 randomized pragmatic trial will test nudges to patients, clinicians, both, or neither to promote supplemental breast MRI screening. Before implementation, rapid cycle approaches informed by clinician and patient experiences and behavioral economics and health equity frameworks guided nudge design. Clinicians will be clustered into clinic groups based on existing administrative departments and care patterns, and these clinic groups will be randomized to have the nudge activated at different times per a stepped wedge design. Clinicians will receive nudges integrated into the routine mammographic report or sent through electronic health record (EHR) in-basket messaging once their clinic group (i.e., wedge) is randomized to receive the intervention. Independently, patients will be randomized to receive text message nudges or not. The primary outcome will be defined as ordering or scheduling supplemental breast MRI. Secondary outcomes include MRI completion, cancer detection rates, and false-positive rates. Patient sociodemographic information and clinic-level variables will be examined as moderators of nudge effectiveness. Qualitative interviews conducted at the trial's conclusion will examine barriers and facilitators to implementation.

DISCUSSION

This study will add to the growing literature on the effectiveness of behavioral economics-informed implementation strategies to promote evidence-based interventions. The design will facilitate testing the relative effects of nudges to patients and clinicians and the effects of moderators of nudge effectiveness, including key indicators of health disparities. The results may inform the introduction of low-cost, scalable implementation strategies to promote early breast cancer detection.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05787249. Registered on March 28, 2023.

A systematic assessment of online international breast density information

BACKGROUND

Breast density has become a topic of international discussion due to its associated risk of breast cancer. As online is often a primary source of women's health information it is therefore essential that breast density information it is understandable, accurate and reflects the best available evidence. This study aimed to systematically assess online international breast density information including recommendations to women.

METHODS

Searches were conducted from five different English-speaking country-specific Google locations. Relevant breast density information was extracted from the identified websites. Readability was assessed using the SHeLL Editor, and understandability and actionability using the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT). A content analysis of specific recommendations to women was also conducted.

RESULTS

Forty-two eligible websites were identified and systematically assessed. The included informational content varied across websites. The average grade reading level across all websites was 12.4 (range 8.9-15.4). The mean understandability was 69.9% and the mean actionability was 40.1%, with 18/42 and 39/42 websites respectively scoring lower than adequate (70%). Thirty-six (85.7%) of the websites had breast density-related recommendation to women, with 'talk to your doctor' (n = 33, 78.6%) the most common.

CONCLUSIONS

Online information about breast density varies widely and is not generally presented in a way that women can easily understand and act on, therefore greatly reducing the ability for informed decision-making. International organisations and groups disseminating breast density information need to ensure that women are presented with health literacy-sensitive and balanced information, and be aware of the impact that recommendations may have on practice.

Evaluating educational interventions to increase breast density awareness among Latinas: A randomized trial in a Federally Qualified Health Center

BACKGROUND

The objective of this randomized trial was to evaluate the short-term effect of bilingual written and interpersonal education regarding mammographic breast density (MBD).

METHODS

Latinas aged 40 to 74 years who were presenting for screening mammography were recruited and randomized 1:1:1 to receive a letter with their mammogram and MBD results (usual care [UC]), a letter plus a brochure (enhanced care [ENH]), or a letter plus a brochure and telephonic promotora education (interpersonal care [INT]). Surveys were administered at enrollment (T₀ ) and 2 weeks to 6 months after intervention delivery (T₁ ). Differences were assessed with χ² , Kruskal-Wallis, and McNemar tests and pairwise comparisons as appropriate. INT metrics and audio recordings were analyzed with descriptive statistics and qualitative content analysis.

RESULTS

Between October 2016 and October 2019, 943 of 1108 Latina participants (85%) completed both surveys. At T₁ , INT participants were more likely (P < .001) to report seeing their MBD results in the letter (70.2%) than UC (53.1%) or ENH participants (55.1%). The percentage of INT women who reported speaking with a provider about MBD (29.0%) was significantly greater (P < .001) than the percentage of UC (14.7%) or ENH participants (15.6%). All groups saw significant (P < .001) but nondifferential improvements in their knowledge of MBD as a masking and risk factor. In the INT group, the promotora delivered education to 77.1% of the 446 participants randomized to INT and answered questions at 28.3% of the encounters for an average of $4.70 per participant.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Latinas in a low-resource setting, MBD knowledge may increase with written or interpersonal education, but with modest investment, interpersonal education may better improve MBD awareness and prompt patient-provider discussions.

Supplemental Cancer Screening for Women With Dense Breasts: Guidance for Health Care Professionals

Mammography is the standard for breast cancer screening. The sensitivity of mammography in identifying breast cancer, however, is reduced for women with dense breasts. Thirty-eight states have passed laws requiring that all women be notified of breast tissue density results in their mammogram report. The notification includes a statement that differs by state, encouraging women to discuss supplemental screening options with their health care professionals (HCPs). Several supplemental screening tests are available for women with dense breast tissue, but no established guidelines exist to direct HCPs in their recommendation of preferred supplemental screening test. Tailored screening, which takes into consideration the patient's mammographic breast density and lifetime breast cancer risk, can guide breast cancer screening strategies that are more comprehensive. This review describes the benefits and limitations of the various available supplemental screening tests to guide HCPs and patients in choosing the appropriate breast cancer screening.

Patient Diversity in Breast Imaging: Barriers and Potential Solutions

Recent reports have highlighted disparities in breast cancer care related to patient diversity. Breast radiologists represent the face of breast imaging and are key players in advocating for patients to reduce these disparities. Diversity-related barriers for breast imaging patients, as they journey from screening to survivorship, include impediments to access and quality of care, gaps in communication, and lack of knowledge in both providers and patients. Potential strategies for overcoming these specific barriers include "culturally tailored" nurse navigators, mobile mammography, improved communication, patient and provider education, and breast radiologist involvement in advocacy efforts promoting diversity. As current trends in recommendations and guidelines for breast imaging include more numerous and advanced imaging modalities, it is important to acknowledge and address diversity-related disparities.

Impact of Improved Screening Mammography Recall Lay Letter Readability on Patient Follow-Up

PURPOSE

In the setting of abnormal results on screening mammography, the Mammography Quality Standards Act mandates that patients receive a mailed "recall" lay letter informing them to return for additional follow-up imaging. The language used in this letter should be "easily understood by a lay person." In February 2019, the authors' institution revised the language of its recall lay letter to the sixth grade reading level. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of improved readability on patient follow-up rates.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, data from all screening mammograms at a single institution with BI-RADS category 0 assessments excluding technical recalls between February 2018 to February 2019 (pre-intervention group) and February 2019 to February 2020 (post-intervention group) were reviewed. The primary outcome measure was the percentage of patients in each intervention group who returned for their diagnostic follow-up examination within 60 days (the standard recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was done to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for follow-up within 60 days.

RESULTS

This study included 1,987 patients in the pre-intervention group and 2,211 patients in the post-intervention group. The patient follow-up rate within 60 days increased from 90.1% (1,790 of 1,987) in the pre-intervention group to 93.9% (2,076 of 2,211) in the post-intervention group (P < .001). When controlling for imaging site, patients in the post-intervention group had 1.96-fold increased odds of returning for a diagnostic follow-up examination within 60 days (95% confidence interval, 1.52-2.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Revising an institution's recall lay letter to a lower reading grade level significantly improved timely patient follow-up.

Dense Breast Notification Letters: What Do Breast Radiologists Think?

OBJECTIVE

The Food and Drug Administration is currently creating national standards for language used in letters sent to women after mammography concerning dense breasts. The purpose of the current study is to survey breast radiologists on their opinions about language to be included in dense breast notification (DBN) letters.

METHODS

An anonymous survey (17 questions and 10 open-ended response fields) was sent to Society of Breast Imaging members between May 2019 and June 2019. Analyses were conducted using a chi-square test and the generalized linear model.

RESULTS

A total of 262 surveys were completed (25% response rate). The majority of breast radiologists believe letters should be sent to patients (91%), with most (66%) believing that patients should receive DBN letters regardless of having dense breasts or not. The majority of breast radiologists believe DBNs should be sent to referring physicians (69%), include statements that define masking (89%), inform patients that dense breasts are associated with cancer risk (77%), inform patients about the possible benefits of supplemental screening (86%), be written at the sixth- or eighth-grade reading level (92%), and should be provided in other languages in addition to English (89%); half of the respondents (51%) believe the letters should contain BI-RADS density descriptors.

CONCLUSION

There is consensus that patients and referring physicians should receive DBN letters and that those letters should address masking, increased cancer risk, and supplemental screening. Respondents believe the letters should be written at a sixth- or eighth-grade reading level.

Evaluation of existing patient educational materials and development of a brochure for women with dense breasts

OBJECTIVES

In this pilot study, we developed and assessed acceptability of a brochure for women with dense breasts.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We measured Flesch-Kincaid Readability of 22 existing breast density educational materials. We then developed a brochure and tested it in two populations of women: 44 safety net hospital patients and 13 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium stakeholders.

RESULTS

Average grade score of existing materials was 10.0 (range: 5.5-12.7). Our brochure had a grade score of 5.9, and patients reported it was easy to understand.

CONCLUSION

Our plain language brochure could improve patient understanding following mandatory dense breast notification.