Comparing cancer screening estimates: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and National Health Interview Survey

Comparative Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Colorectal Cancer Screening With Blood-Based Biomarkers (Liquid Biopsy) vs Fecal Tests or Colonoscopy

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is highly effective but underused. Blood-based biomarkers (liquid biopsy) could improve screening participation.

METHODS

Using our established Markov model, screening every 3 years with a blood-based test that meets minimum Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' thresholds (CMSmin) (CRC sensitivity 74%, specificity 90%) was compared with established alternatives. Test attributes were varied in sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

CMSmin reduced CRC incidence by 40% and CRC mortality by 52% vs no screening. These reductions were less profound than the 68%-79% and 73%-81%, respectively, achieved with multi-target stool DNA (Cologuard; Exact Sciences) every 3 years, annual fecal immunochemical testing (FIT), or colonoscopy every 10 years. Assuming the same cost as multi-target stool DNA, CMSmin cost $28,500/quality-adjusted life-year gained vs no screening, but FIT, colonoscopy, and multi-target stool DNA were less costly and more effective. CMSmin would match FIT's clinical outcomes if it achieved 1.4- to 1.8-fold FIT's participation rate. Advanced precancerous lesion (APL) sensitivity was a key determinant of a test's effectiveness. A paradigm-changing blood-based test (sensitivity >90% for CRC and 80% for APL; 90% specificity; cost ≤$120-$140) would be cost-effective vs FIT at comparable participation.

CONCLUSIONS

CMSmin could contribute to CRC control by achieving screening in those who will not use established methods. Substituting blood-based testing for established effective CRC screening methods will require higher CRC and APL sensitivities that deliver programmatic benefits matching those of FIT. High APL sensitivity, which can result in CRC prevention, should be a top priority for screening test developers. APL detection should not be penalized by a definition of test specificity that focuses on CRC only.

Association of COVID-19 Pandemic with Colorectal Cancer Screening: Impact of Race/Ethnicity and Social Vulnerability

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted health care delivery, including cancer screening practices. This study sought to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on colorectal cancer (CRC) screening relative to social vulnerability.

METHODS

Using the Medicare Standard Analytic File, individuals 65 years old or older who were eligible for guideline-concordant CRC screening between 2019 and 2021 were identified. These data were merged with the Center for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) dataset. Changes in county-level monthly screening volumes relative to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020) and easing of restrictions (March 2021) were assessed relative to SVI.

RESULTS

Among 10,503,180 individuals continuously enrolled in Medicare with no prior diagnosis of CRC, 1,362,457 (12.97%) underwent CRC screening between 2019 and 2021. With the COVID-19 pandemic, CRC screening decreased markedly across the United States (median monthly screening: pre-pandemic [n = 76,444] vs pandemic era [n = 60,826]; median Δn = 15,618; p < 0.001). The 1-year post-pandemic overall CRC screening utilization generally rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels (monthly median screening volumes: pandemic era [n = 60,826] vs post-pandemic [n = 74,170]; median Δn = 13,344; p < 0.001). Individuals residing in counties with the highest SVI experienced a larger decline in CRC screening odds than individuals residing in low-SVI counties (reference, low SVI: pre-pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.85] vs pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.81] vs post-pandemic high SVI [OR, 0.85]; all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic was associated with a decrease in CRC screening volumes. Patients who resided in high social vulnerability areas experienced the greatest pandemic-related decline.

Breast cancer and gender-affirming hormone therapy for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals

Transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) individuals are at risk for breast cancer, but are less likely to undergo screening mammograms and appear to suffer poorer cancer-related outcomes than cisgender women. Gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) may be lifesaving for TGD individuals from the perspective of affirming their core identities; however, the effects of GAHT on cancer development, progression, and outcomes are poorly understood.

Examining cancer screening disparities by race/ethnicity and insurance groups: A comparison of 2008 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) data in the United States

BACKGROUND

Pervasive differences in cancer screening among race/ethnicity and insurance groups presents a challenge to achieving equitable healthcare access and health outcomes. However, the change in the magnitude of cancer screening disparities over time has not been thoroughly examined using recent public health survey data.

METHODS

A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the 2008 and 2018 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) database focused on breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening rates among race/ethnicity and insurance groups. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the relationship between cancer screening rates, race/ethnicity, and insurance coverage, and to quantify the changes in disparities in 2008 and 2018, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer screening rates increased for all groups, but cervical and mammogram rates remained stagnant for specific groups. Non-Hispanic Asians continued to report consistently lower odds of receiving cervical tests (OR: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.32-0.55, p<0.001) and colorectal cancer screening (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.42-0.72, p<0.001) compared to non-Hispanic Whites in 2018, despite significant improvements since 2008. Non-Hispanic Blacks continued to report higher odds of recent cervical cancer screening (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.47-2.68, p<0.001) and mammograms (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.02-1.71, p<0.05) than non-Hispanic Whites in 2018, consistent with higher odds observed in 2008. Hispanic individuals reported improved colorectal cancer screening over time, with no significant difference compared to non-Hispanics Whites in 2018, despite reporting lower odds in 2008. The uninsured status was associated with significantly lower odds of cancer screening than private insurance for all three cancers in 2008 and 2018.

CONCLUSION

Despite an overall increase in breast and colorectal cancer screening rates between 2008 and 2018, persistent racial/ethnic and insurance disparities exist among race/ethnicity and insurance groups. These findings highlight the importance of addressing underlying factors contributing to disparities among underserved populations and developing corresponding interventions.

Variation in State-Level Mammography Use, 2012 and 2020

OBJECTIVES

Mammography is a screening tool for early detection of breast cancer. Uptake in screening use in states can be influenced by Medicaid coverage and eligibility policies, public health outreach efforts, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program. We described state-specific mammography use in 2020 and changes as compared with 2012.

METHODS

We estimated the proportion of women aged ≥40 years who reported receiving a mammogram in the past 2 years, by age group, state, and demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, using 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data. We also compared 2020 state estimates with 2012 estimates.

RESULTS

The proportion of women aged 50-74 years who received a mammogram in the past 2 years was 78.1% (95% CI, 77.4%-78.8%) in 2020. Across measures of socioeconomic status, mammography use was generally lower among women who did not have health insurance (52.0%; 95% CI, 48.3%-55.6%) than among those who did (79.9%; 95% CI, 79.3%-80.6%) and among those who had a usual source of care (49.4%; 95% CI, 46.1%-52.7%) than among those who did not (81.0%; 95% CI, 80.4%-81.7%). Among women aged 50-74 years, mammography use varied across states, from a low of 65.2% (95% CI, 61.4%-69.0%) in Wyoming to a high of 86.1% (95% CI, 83.8%-88.3%) in Massachusetts. Four states had significant increases in mammography use from 2012 to 2020, and 8 states had significant declines.

CONCLUSION

Mammography use varied widely among states. Use of evidence-based interventions tailored to the needs of local populations and communities may help close gaps in the use of mammography.

The Clinical Impact and Cost-Effectiveness of Surveillance of Incidentally Detected Gastric Intestinal Metaplasia: A Microsimulation Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gastric intestinal metaplasia (GIM) is associated with a higher risk of noncardia intestinal gastric adenocarcinoma (GA). The aim of this study was to estimate lifetime benefits, complications, and cost-effectiveness of GIM surveillance using esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD).

METHODS

We developed a semi-Markov microsimulation model of patients with incidentally detected GIM, to compare the effectiveness of EGD surveillance with no surveillance at 10-year, 5-year, 3-year, 2-year, and 1-year intervals. We modeled a simulated cohort of 1,000,000 US individuals aged 50 with incidental GIM. Outcome measures were lifetime GA incidence, mortality, number of EGDs, complications, undiscounted life-years gained, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

RESULTS

In the absence of surveillance, the model simulated 32.0 lifetime GA cases and 23.0 lifetime GA deaths per 1000 individuals with GIM, respectively. Among surveilled individuals, simulated lifetime GA incidence (per 1000) decreased with shorter surveillance intervals (10-year to 1-year, 11.2-6.1) as did GA mortality (7.4-3.6). Compared with no surveillance, all modeled surveillance intervals yielded greater life expectancy (87-190 undiscounted life-years gained per 1000); 5-year surveillance provided the greatest number of life-years gained per EGD performed and was the cost-effective strategy ($40,706/QALY). In individuals with risk factors of family history of GA or anatomically extensive, incomplete-type GIM intensified 3-year surveillance was cost-effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $28,156/QALY and $87,020/QALY, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Using microsimulation modeling, surveillance of incidentally detected GIM every 5 years is associated with reduced GA incidence/mortality and is cost-effective from a health care sector perspective. Real-world studies evaluating the impact of GIM surveillance on GA incidence and mortality in the United States are needed.

Inequities in colorectal and breast cancer screening: At the intersection of race/ethnicity, sexuality, and gender

Objective

To investigate the joint impact of sexual orientation, gender identity, and race/ethnicity on colorectal and breast cancer screening disparities in the United States.

Methods

Utilizing sampling weighted data from the 2016 and 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we assessed differences in two metrics via chi-square statistics: 1) lifetime uptake, and 2) up-to-date colorectal and breast cancer screening by sexual orientation and gender identity, within and across racial/ethnic classifications.

Results

Within specific races/ethnicities, lifetime CRC screening was higher among gay/lesbian (within NH-White, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander) and bisexual individuals (Hispanic) compared to straight individuals, and lowest overall among transgender women and transgender nonconforming populations (p < 0.05). Asian transgender women had the lowest lifetime CRC screening (13.0%; w.n. = 1,428). Lifetime breast cancer screening was lowest among the Hispanic bisexual population (86.6%; w.n. = 26,940) and Hispanic transgender nonconforming population (71.8%; w.n. = 739); within all races, SGM individuals (except NH-White, Hispanic, and Black bisexual populations, and NH-White transgender men) had greater breast cancer screening adherence compared to straight individuals.

Conclusions

Due to small, unweighted sample sizes, results should be interpreted with caution. Heterogeneity in screening participation by SGM status within and across racial/ethnic groups were observed, revealing the need to disaggregate data to account for intersecting identities and for studies with larger sample sizes to increase estimate reliability.

Reducing disparities and achieving health equity in colorectal cancer screening

Increases in colorectal cancer screening are linked to the declining incidence of the disease over the past three decades. These favorable trends, however, are not observed in marginalized racial and ethnic populations with disproportionately lower rates of screening, higher disease incidence, and increased mortality despite advances in health technology and policy. This review describes the differences in screening uptake and test selection amongst racial and ethnic groups, discusses known obstacles and facilitators that impact screening, and highlights existing frameworks developed to achieve health equity in colorectal cancer screening.

Multilevel Small Area Estimation for County-Level Prevalence of Mammography Use in the United States Using 2018 Data

Background: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends biennial screening mammography for average-risk women aged 50-74 years. We aim to generate county-level prevalence estimates for mammography use to examine disparities among counties. Materials and Methods: We used data from the 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) (n = 111,902 women) and linked them to county-level data from the American Community Survey. We defined two outcomes: mammography within the past 2 years (current); and mammography 5 or more years ago or never (rarely or never). We poststratified the data with U.S. Census estimated county population counts, ran Monte Carlo simulations, and generated county-level estimates. We aggregated estimates to state and national levels. We validated internal consistency between our model-based and BRFSS state estimates using Spearman and Pearson correlation coefficients. Results: Nationally, more than three in four women [78.7% (95% confidence interval {CI}: 78.2%-79.2%)] were current with mammography, although with large variations among counties. Also, nationally, about one in nine women [11% (95% CI: 10.8%-11.3%)] rarely or never had a mammogram. County estimates for being current ranged from 60.4% in New Mexico to 86.9% in Hawaii. Rarely or never having a mammogram ranged from 6% in Connecticut to 23.0% in Alaska, and on average, almost one in eight women in all the counties. Internal consistency correlation coefficient tests were ≥0.94. Conclusions: Our analyses identified marked county variations in mammography use across the country among women aged 50-74 years. We generated estimates for all counties, which may be helpful for targeted outreach to increase mammography uptake.

Use Trends and Recent Expenditures for Cervical Cancer Screening-Associated Services in Medicare Fee-for-Service Beneficiaries Older Than 65 Years

Importance

Since 1996, the US Preventive Services Task Force has recommended against cervical cancer screening in average-risk women 65 years or older with adequate prior screening. Little is known about the use of cervical cancer screening-associated services in this age group.

Objective

To examine annual use trends in cervical cancer screening-associated services, specifically cytology and human papillomavirus (HPV) tests, colposcopy, and cervical procedures (loop electrosurgical excision procedure, cone biopsy, and ablation) in Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries during January 1, 1999, to December 31, 2019, and estimate expenditures for services performed in 2019.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This population-based, cross-sectional analysis included health service use data across 21 years for women aged 65 to 114 years with Medicare fee-for-service coverage (15-16 million women per year). Data analysis was conducted between July 2021 and April 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Proportion of testing modalities (cytology alone, cytology plus HPV testing [cotesting], HPV testing alone); annual use rate per 100 000 women of cytology and HPV testing, colposcopy, and cervical procedures from 1999 to 2019; Medicare expenditure for these services in 2019.

Results

There were 15 323 635 women 65 years and older with Medicare fee-for-service coverage in 1999 and 15 298 656 in 2019. In 2019, the mean (SD) age of study population was 76.2 (8.1) years, 5.1% were Hispanic, 0.5% were non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native, 3.0% were non-Hispanic Asian/Pacific Islander, 7.4% were non-Hispanic Black, and 82.0% were non-Hispanic White. From 1999 to 2019, the percentage of women who received at least 1 cytology or HPV test decreased from 18.9% (2.9 million women) in 1999 to 8.5% (1.3 million women) in 2019, a reduction of 55.3%; use rates of colposcopy and cervical procedures decreased 43.2% and 64.4%, respectively. Trend analyses showed a 4.6% average annual reduction in use of cytology or HPV testing during 1999 to 2019 (P < .001). Use rates of colposcopy and cervical procedures decreased before 2015 then plateaued during 2015 to 2019. The total Medicare expenditure for all services rendered in 2019 was about $83.5 million. About 3% of women older than 80 years received at least 1 service at a cost of $7.4 million in 2019.

Conclusions and Relevance

The results of this cross-sectional study suggest that while annual use of cervical cancer screening-associated services in the Medicare fee-for-service population older than 65 years has decreased during the last 2 decades, more than 1.3 million women received these services in 2019 at substantial costs.

Multicancer early detection test: Preclinical, translational, and clinical evidence-generation plan and provocative questions

Minimally invasive molecular biomarkers have been applied to the early detection of multiple cancers in large scale case-control and cohort studies. These demonstrations of feasibility herald the potential for permanent transformation of current cancer screening paradigms. This commentary discusses the major opportunities and challenges facing the preclinical development and clinical validation of multicancer early detection test strategies. From a diverse set of early detection research perspectives, the authors recommend specific approaches and highlight important questions for future investigation.

Prevalence of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Hispanic Subgroups in the United States: NHIS 2010 and 2015 Data

Introduction: Much of the data related to colorectal cancer (CRC) disease burden among Hispanics is grouped together. The purpose of our study was to better understand the current screening uptake across Hispanic subgroups. Methods: Data from the CRC screening portion of the 2010 and 2015 Adult Cancer Control Module of the National Hispanic Interview Survey (NHIS). A univariate and multivariable analysis were conducted. Results: Total sample size: 7,389. Subgroup with most participants: Mexican-American. For all Hispanics, 24% were up to date with CRC screening. In adjusted analyses, variables significantly associated with being up to date among all Hispanics were: older age (prevalence ratio [PR] = 1.03; p = <.0001), female sex (PR = 1.28; p = 0.003), more than high school education (PR = 1.25; p = 0.006), annual household income between $45,000 and $74,999 ( PR = 1.51; p = 0.018), living in the United States for 15 years or more (PR = 1.45; p = 0.039), having health insurance (PR = 2.06; p = <.0001), and having a first-degree relative with CRC (PR = 1.35; p < .0001). Discussion: Various social determinants of health were found to be associated with increased prevalence of being up to date with CRC screening among different Hispanic subgroups. Conclusion: These findings serve as a starting point to develop interventions tailored to specific Hispanic subgroups with social determinants of health, namely low socioeconomic status, at the forefront of development.

Age-Specific Rates and Time-Courses of Gastrointestinal and Nongastrointestinal Complications Associated With Screening/Surveillance Colonoscopy

INTRODUCTION

The rates of serious cardiac, neurologic, and pulmonary events attributable to colonoscopy are poorly characterized, and background event rates are usually not accounted for.

METHODS

We performed a multistate population-based study using changepoint analysis to determine the rates and timing of serious gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal adverse events associated with screening/surveillance colonoscopy, including analyses by age (45 to <55, 55 to <65, 65 to <75, and ≥75 years). Among 4.5 million persons in the Ambulatory Surgery and Services Databases of California, Florida, and New York who underwent screening/surveillance colonoscopy in 2005-2015, we ascertained serious postcolonoscopy events in excess of background rates in Emergency Department (SEDD) and Inpatient Databases (SID).

RESULTS

Most serious nongastrointestinal postcolonoscopy events were expected based on the background rate and not associated with colonoscopy itself. However, associated nongastrointestinal events predominated over gastrointestinal events at ages ≥65 years, including more myocardial infarctions plus ischemic strokes than perforations at ages ≥75 years (361 [95% confidence intervals {CI} 312-419] plus 1,279 [95% CI 1,182-1,384] vs 912 [95% CI 831-1,002] per million). At all ages, the observed-to-expected ratios for days 0-7, 0-30, and 0-60 after colonoscopy were substantially >1 for gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation, but minimally >1 for most nongastrointestinal complications. Risk periods ranged from 1 to 125 days depending on complication type and age. No excess postcolonoscopy in-hospital deaths were observed.

DISCUSSION

Although crude counts substantially overestimate nongastrointestinal events associated with colonoscopy, nongastrointestinal complications exceed bleeding and perforation risk in older persons. The inability to ascertain modifications to antiplatelet therapy was a study limitation. Our results can inform benefit-to-risk determinations for preventive colonoscopy.

Reduction in Standard Cancer Screening in 2020 throughout the U.S

Cancer screening is an important way to reduce the burden of cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic created delays in screening with the potential to increase cancer disparities in the United States (U.S.). Data from the 2014-2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey were analyzed to estimate the percentages of adults who reported cancer screening in the last 12 months consistent with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation for cervical (ages 21-65), breast (ages 50-74), and colorectal cancer (ages 50-75) prior to the pandemic. Cancer screening percentages for 2020 (April-December excluding January-March) were compared to screening percentages for 2014-2019 to begin to look at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening percentages for 2020 were decreased from those for 2014-2019 including several underserved racial groups. Decreases in mammography and colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy were higher among American Indian/Alaskan Natives, Hispanics, and multiracial participants, but decreases in pap test were also highest among Hispanics, Whites, Asians, and African-Americans/Blacks. Decreases in mammograms among women ages 40-49 were also seen. As the 2020 comparison is conservative, the 2021 decreases in cancer screening are expected to be much greater and are likely to increase cancer disparities substantially.

A Single-Center Study of Adherence to Breast Cancer Screening Mammography Guidelines by Transgender and Non-Binary Patients

BACKGROUND

Adherence to screening guidelines among transgender and non-binary (TGNB) populations is not well studied. This study examines breast cancer screening patterns among TGNB patients at an urban academic medical center.

METHODS

Demographic information, risk factors, and screening mammography were collected. Mammography rates were calculated in populations of interest according to national guidelines, and mammogram person-years were also calculated. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 253 patients were analyzed: 193 transgender women and non-binary people designated male at birth (TGNB DMAB) and 60 transgender men and non-binary people designated female at birth (TGNB DFAB). The median (interquartile range) age was 53.2 years (42.3-62.6). Most patients had no family history of breast cancer (n = 163, 64.4%) and were on hormone therapy (n = 191, 75.5%). Most patients where White (n = 164, 64.8%), employed (n = 113, 44.7%), and had public insurance (n = 128, 50.6%). TGNB DFAB breast screening rates were low, ranging from 2.0 to 50.0%, as were TGNB DMAB screening rates, ranging from 7.1 to 47.6%. The screening rates among the TGNB DFAB and TGNB DMAB groups did not significantly differ from one another. Among TGNB DFAB patients, univariate analyses showed no significant predictors for mammography. Among TGNB DMAB patients, not being on hormone therapy resulted in fewer odds of undergoing mammography. There were no significant findings on multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION

Mammography rates in the TGNB population are lower than institutional and national rates for cisgender patients, which are 77.3% and 66.7-78.4%, respectively. Stage of transition, organs present, hormone therapy, and risk factors should be considered to guide screening.

Adenoma and Serrated Lesion Detection by Colonoscopy Indication: The ADR-ESS (ADR Extended to all Screening/Surveillance) Score

BACKGROUND

The adenoma detection rate at screening (ADR) predicts interval colorectal cancer. Monitoring other lesion detection rates and colonoscopy indications has been proposed. We developed a comprehensive, automated colonoscopy audit program based on standardized clinical documentation, explored detection rates across indications, and developed the Adenoma Detection Rate - Extended to all Screening / Surveillance (ADR-ESS) score.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study, we calculated overall and advanced adenoma and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) detection rates among 15,253 colonoscopies by 35 endoscopists from 4 endoscopy units across all colonoscopy indications. We explored correlations between detection rates, and the precision and stability of ADR-ESS versus ADR.

RESULTS

The overall "screening, first" ADR was 36.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 34.5%-38.1%). The adenoma detection rate was lower for "screening, not first" (relative rate [RR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74-0.87) and "family history" (RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74-0.96), and higher for "surveillance" (RR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15-1.31) and "follow-up, FIT" (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07-1.37). For "screening, first," the detection rates for advanced adenoma, SSL, and advanced SSL were 6.7% (95% CI, 5.7%-7.7%), 7.2% (95% CI, 6.2%-8.2%), and 2.6% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.2%), respectively. Adenoma and SSL detection were correlated (r = 0.44; P = .008). ADR-ESS had substantially narrower confidence intervals and less period-to-period variability than ADR, and was not improved by weighting for indication volume and correction for detection by indication.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive, automated colonoscopy audit based on standardized clinical documentation is feasible. Adenoma detection is a fair but imperfect proxy for SSL detection. ADR-ESS increases the precision of adenoma detection assessments and emphasizes quality across colonoscopy indications.

Sources of Missing Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Data in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

INTRODUCTION

This paper describes the sources, magnitude, and correlates of missing data in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module.

METHODS

Missing data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module fielded from 2014 to 2019 were ascribed to 4 sources: the optional nature of the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module, out-of-state cell phone respondents, interview termination, and item nonresponse. The prevalence of missingness from these 4 sources was examined in relation to sociodemographic factors and survey process factors. Data were analyzed in 2018-2020.

RESULTS

From 2014 to 2019, of 2,698,738 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System respondents, 1,330,025 (44.8%, weighted) were in states that did not administer the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module. Among 723,301 cell phone interviews in states administering the module, 12.5% (weighted) were out of state. Among 1,316,174 otherwise potential respondents, 9.4% (weighted) terminated the interview before Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module administration. Among 1,205,177 administered the module, item-level missingness was 3.4% for sexual orientation and 1.3% for gender identity. Correlates of missingness varied considerably at each stage.

CONCLUSIONS

Missing the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity data is much more prevalent than item nonresponse alone would suggest. Analytic techniques that consider only item nonresponse, such as complete case analysis, risk producing biased findings. Including the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity module in the required core demographics section is the only feasible method to reduce the amount and complexity of missing data.

Disparities in Meeting USPSTF Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Guidelines Among Women in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Many sociodemographic factors affect women's ability to meet cancer screening guidelines. Our objective was to examine which sociodemographic characteristics were associated with women meeting US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening.

METHODS

We used 2018 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data to examine the association between sociodemographic variables, such as race/ethnicity, rurality, education, and insurance status, and self-reported cancer screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer. We used multivariable log-binomial regression models to estimate adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Overall, the proportion of women meeting USPSTF guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening was more than 70%. The prevalence of meeting screening guidelines was 6% to 10% greater among non-Hispanic Black women than among non-Hispanic White women across all 3 types of cancer screening. Women who lacked health insurance had a 26% to 39% lower screening prevalence across screening types than women with health insurance. Compared with women with $50,000 or more in annual household income, women with less than $50,000 in annual household income had a 3% to 8% lower screening prevalence across all 3 screening types. For colorectal cancer, the prevalence of screening was 7% less among women who lived in rural counties than among women in metropolitan counties.

CONCLUSION

Many women still do not meet current USPSTF guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. Screening disparities are persistent among socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, especially women with low incomes and without health insurance. To increase the prevalence of cancer screening and reduce disparities, interventions must focus on reducing economic barriers and improving access to care.

Long-Term Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality After Colonoscopy Screening According to Individuals' Risk Profiles

BACKGROUND

It remains unknown whether the benefit of colonoscopy screening against colorectal cancer (CRC) and the optimal age to start screening differ by CRC risk-profile.

METHODS

Among 75,873 women and 42,875 men, we defined a CRC risk score (0-8) based on family history, aspirin, height, body mass index, smoking, physical-activity, alcohol, and diet. We calculated colonoscopy screening-associated hazard ratios (HRs) and absolute risk reductions (ARRs) for CRC incidence and mortality and age-specific CRC cumulative incidence according to risk score. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

During a median of 26 years' follow-up, we documented 2,407 CRC cases and 874 CRC deaths. While the screening-associated hazard ratio did not vary by risk score, the absolute risk reductions in multivariable-adjusted 10-year CRC incidence more than doubled for individuals with score 6-8 (ARR = 0.34%, 95% CI = 0.26% to 0.42%) compared to 0-2 (ARR = 0.15%, 95% CI = 0.12% to 0.18%; Ptrend<0.001). Similar results were found for CRC mortality (ARR = 0.22% [95% CI = 0.21% to 0.24%] vs. 0.08% [95% CI = 0.07% to 0.08%]; Ptrend<0.001). The absolute risk reduction in mortality of distal-colon and rectal cancers was four-fold higher for score 6-8 than 0-2 (distal-colon cancer: ARR = 0.08% [95% CI = 0.07% to 0.08%] vs. 0.02% [95% CI = 0.02% to 0.02%], Ptrend <0.001; rectal cancer: ARR = 0.08% [95% CI = 0.08% to 0.09%] vs. 0.02% [95% CI = 0.02% to 0.03%], Ptrend <0.001). When using age 45 years as the benchmark to start screening, individuals with risk score of 0-2, 3, 4, 5, and 6-8 attained the threshold CRC risk level (10-year cumulative risk of 0.47%) at age 51, 48, 45, 42, and 38 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The absolute benefit of colonoscopy screening is more than twice higher for individuals with the highest than lowest CRC risk profile. Individuals with a high and low risk profile may start screening up to 6-7 years earlier and later, respectively, than the recommended age 45 years.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Personalized Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment vs Education to Promote Screening Uptake

INTRODUCTION

Risk stratification has been proposed as a strategy to improve participation in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but evidence is lacking. We performed a randomized controlled trial of risk stratification using the National Cancer Institute's Colorectal Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (CCRAT) on screening intent and completion.

METHODS

A total of 230 primary care patients eligible for first-time CRC screening were randomized to risk assessment via CCRAT or education control. Follow-up of screening intent and completion was performed by record review and phone at 6 and 12 months. We analyzed change in intent after intervention, time to screening, overall screening completion rates, and screening completion by CCRAT risk score tertile.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 61.7% of patients were aged <60 years, 58.7% female, and 94.3% with college or higher education. Time to screening did not differ between arms (hazard ratio 0.78 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-1.18], P = 0.24). At 12 months, screening completion was 38.6% with CCRAT vs 44.0% with education (odds ratio [OR] 0.80 [95% CI 0.47-1.37], P = 0.41). Changes in screening intent did not differ between the risk assessment and education arms (precontemplation to contemplation: OR 1.52 [95% CI 0.81-2.86], P = 0.19; contemplation to precontemplation: OR 1.93 [95% CI 0.45-8.34], P = 0.38). There were higher screening completion rates at 12 months in the top CCRAT risk tertile (52.6%) vs the bottom (32.4%) and middle (31.6%) tertiles (P = 0.10).

DISCUSSION

CCRAT risk assessment did not increase screening participation or intent. Risk stratification might motivate persons classified as higher CRC risk to complete screening, but unintentionally discourage screening among persons not identified as higher risk.

Colorectal Cancer Screening Uptake: Differences Between Rural and Urban Privately-Insured Population

Earlier studies investigated rural-urban colorectal cancer (CRC) screening disparities among older adults or used surveys. The objective was to compare screening uptake between rural and urban individuals 50–64 years of age using private health insurance. Data were analyzed from 58,774 Blue Cross Blue Shield of Nebraska beneficiaries. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between rural-urban and CRC screening use. Results indicate that rural individuals were 56% more likely to use the Fecal Occult Blood Test (FOBT) compared with urban residents, but rural females were 68% less likely to use FOBT. Individuals with few Primary Care Physician (PCP) visits and rural-women are the least to receive screening. To enhance CRC screening, a policy should be devised for the training and placement of female PCP in rural areas. In particular, multilevel interventions, including education, more resources, and policies to increase uptake of colorectal cancer screening, are needed. Further research is warranted to investigate barriers to CRC screening in rural areas.

Black and White Differences in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Screening Outcomes: A Narrative Review

Racial disparities in colorectal cancer incidence are widely documented. There are two potential mechanisms for these disparities: differences in access to screening, including screening follow-up, and differences in underlying risk of colorectal cancer. We reviewed the literature for evidence of these two mechanisms. We show that higher colorectal cancer incidence in blacks relative to whites emerged only after the dissemination of screening and describe evidence of racial disparities in screening rates. In contrast to the strong evidence for differences in colorectal cancer screening utilization, there is limited evidence for racial differences in adenoma prevalence. In general, black and white patients who are screened have similar adenoma prevalence, though there is some evidence that advanced adenomas and adenomas in the proximal colon are somewhat more likely in black than white patients. We conclude that higher rates of colorectal cancer incidence among black patients are primarily driven by lower rates of colorectal cancer screening. Our findings highlight the need to increase black patients' access to quality screening to reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality.

Risk of ambulatory colonoscopy in patients with cirrhosis: a propensity-score matched cohort study

Background and study aims  Patients with cirrhosis demonstrate alterations in physiology, hemodynamics, and immunity which may increase procedural risk. There exist sparse data regarding the safety of performing ambulatory colonoscopy in patients with cirrhosis. Patients and methods  From a population-based sample of three North American states (California, Florida, and New York), we collected data on 3,590 patients with cirrhosis who underwent ambulatory colonoscopy from 2009 to 2014. We created a control cohort propensity score-matched for cirrhotic severity who did not undergo colonoscopy (N = 3,590) in order to calculate the attributable risk for adverse events. The primary endpoint was the rate of unplanned hospital encounters (UHEs) within 14 days of colonoscopy (or from a synthetic index date for the control cohort). Predictors for UHE were assessed in multivariable regression. Results  The attributable risk for any UHE following colonoscopy was 3.1 % (confidence interval [CI] 2.1-4.1 %, P  < 0.001). There was increased risk for infection (0.9 %, CI 0.7-1.1 %), spontaneous bacterial peritonitis (0.1 %, CI 0.0-0.3 %), decompensation of ascites (0.3 %, CI 0.2-0.4 %), and cardiovascular event (0.4 %, CI 0.3-0.5 %). There was no increased attributable risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, perforation, or development of the hepatorenal syndrome. The presence of ascites at time of procedure was the only predictor for UHE in the fully-adjusted model (OR 2.6, CI 1.9-3.5, P  < 0.001). Conclusions  There is a moderate though detectable increase in risk for adverse event following ambulatory colonoscopy in patients with cirrhosis. The presence of ascites in particular portends higher risk. These data may guide clinicians when counseling patients with cirrhosis on the choice of colorectal cancer screening modality.

Factors associated with mammography use: A side-by-side comparison of results from two national surveys

BACKGROUND

Mammography use is affected by multiple factors that may change as public health interventions are implemented. We examined two nationally representative, population-based surveys to seek consensus and identify inconsistencies in factors associated with mammography use in the entirety of the US population, and by black and white subgroups.

METHODS

Self-reported mammography use in the past year was extracted for 12 639 and 169 116 women aged 40-74 years from the 2016 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), respectively. We applied a random forest algorithm to identify the risk factors of mammography use and used a subset of them in multivariable survey logistic regressions to examine their associations with mammography use, reporting predictive margins and effect sizes.

RESULTS

The weighted prevalence of past year mammography use was comparable across surveys: 54.31% overall, 54.50% in white, and 61.57% in black in NHIS and 53.24% overall, 56.97% in white, and 62.11% in black in BRFSS. Overall, mammography use was positively associated with black race, older age, higher income, and having health insurance, while negatively associated with having three or more children at home and residing in the Western region of the US. Overweight and moderate obesity were significantly associated with increased mammography use among black women (NHIS), while severe obesity was significantly associated with decreased mammography use among white women (BRFSS).

CONCLUSION

We found higher mammography use among black women than white women, a change in the historical trend. We also identified high parity as a risk factor for mammography use, which suggests a potential subpopulation to target with interventions aimed at increasing mammography use.

Trends and Predictors for the Uptake of Colon Cancer Screening Using the Fecal Occult Blood Test in Spain from 2011 to 2017

Background: In Spain, colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test, targeted towards the 50–69 age bracket, was implemented on different dates. We aim to assess the temporal trend of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening uptake according to the year of screening implementation in each region and to identify predictors for the uptake of CRC screening. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 12,657 participants from the Spanish National Health Surveys 2011 and 2017 was used. Uptake rates were analyzed according to the date that the screening program was implemented. Results: For regions with programs implemented before 2011, the uptake rate increased 3.34-fold from 2011 to 2017 (9.8% vs. 32.7%; p < 0.001). For regions that implemented screening within the 2011–2016 period, the uptake rose from 4.3% to 13.2% (3.07-fold; p < 0.001), and for regions that implemented screening after 2016, the uptake increased from 3.4% to 8.8% (2.59-fold; p < 0.001). For the entire Spanish population, the uptake increased 3.21-fold (6.8% vs. 21.8%; p < 0.001). Positive predictors for uptake were older age, Spanish nationality, middle-to-high educational level, suffering chronic diseases, non-smoking and living in regions where screening programs were implemented earlier. Conclusions: The different periods for the implementation of CRC screening as well as sociodemographic and health inequalities may have limited the improvement in the screening uptake from 2011 to 2017 in Spain.

Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening in the United States Before and After Implementation of the Affordable Care Act

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is major cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Screening, however, is suboptimal and there are disparities in outcomes. After health policy changes and national efforts to increase rates of screening and address inequities, we aimed to examine progress towards eliminating racial and ethnic disparities in CRC screening.

METHODS

We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis of average-risk adults (age 50-75 years) included in the behavioral risk factors surveillance system survey. The main outcome was CRC screening status. We determined screening rates overall and by race and ethnicity (1 variable) for each survey year from 2008 through 2016 and used Joinpoint analyses to determine significant trends in rates over time by race and ethnicity. We also examined screening modalities used overall and by race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 1,089,433 respondents. Screening uptake was 61.1% in 2008 and 67.6% in 2016 (P < .001); it was highest among whites and lowest among Hispanics. Only whites, Hispanics, and Asians had significantly higher screening rates in each study year (P < .001). Despite increasing rates among Hispanics, the screening rate disparity between whites and Hispanics was 17% at the end of the study period. Screening rates in blacks did not change with time and were 4.0% lower than the rate in whites in 2016. Other racial and ethnic groups had varying levels of improvement with time. Colonoscopy was the most common modality each year.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cross-sectional analysis of average-risk adults, we found that although rates of CRC screening have increased overall since 2008, they have increased disproportionately in each racial and ethnic group, and disparities in screening uptake persist.

Current Guidelines and Gaps in Breast Cancer Screening

Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer in women and the second leading cause of cancer death for women in the United States. Mammography screening is proven to significantly decrease breast cancer mortality, with a 40% or more reduction expected with annual use starting at age 40 for women of average risk. However, less than half of all eligible women have a mammogram annually. The elimination of cost sharing for screening made possible by the Affordable Care Act (2010) encouraged screening but mainly for those already insured. The United States Preventive Services Task Force 2009 guidelines recommended against screening those 40 to 49 years old and have left women over 74 years of age vulnerable to coverage loss. Other populations for whom significant gaps in risk information or screening use exist, including women of lower socioeconomic status, black women, men at higher than average risk of breast cancer, and sexual and gender minorities. Further work is needed to achieve higher rates of screening acceptance for all appropriate individuals so that the full mortality and treatment benefits of mammography screening can be realized.

The case for philanthropic investment to increase colorectal cancer screening rates: A novel paradigm to address a public health challenge

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer‐related death despite being highly preventable. Efforts to increase participation in CRC screening have not met national goals. We developed a novel approach: building a business case for philanthropic investment in CRC screening.

Methods

A taskforce representing the public health community, professional societies, charitable foundations, academia, and industry was assembled to: (a) quantify the impact of improving CRC screening rates; (b) identify barriers to screening; (c) estimate the “activation cost” to overcome barriers and screen one additional person; (d) develop a holistic business case that is attractive to philanthropists; and (e) launch a demonstration project.

Results

We estimated that of 50 600 CRC deaths annually in the US, 55% occur in 50‐ to 85‐year‐olds and are potentially addressable by improvements in CRC screening. Barriers to screening were identified in all patient journey phases, including lack of awareness or insurance and logistical challenges in the pre‐physician phase. The cost to activate one person to undergo screening was $25‐175. This translated into a cost of $6000‐36 000 per CRC death averted by philanthropic investment. Based on this work, the Colorectal Cancer Alliance launched the effort “March Forth” to prevent 100 000 CRC deaths in the US over 10 years, with the first pilot in Philadelphia.

Conclusions

A holistic business plan can attract philanthropy to promote CRC screening. A simple message of “You can save a life from CRC with a $25 000 donation” can motivate demonstration projects in regions with high CRC rates and low screening participation.

Small Area Estimation of Cancer Risk Factors and Screening Behaviors in US Counties by Combining Two Large National Health Surveys

Background

National health surveys, such as the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), collect data on cancer screening and smoking-related measures in the US noninstitutionalized population. These surveys are designed to produce reliable estimates at the national and state levels. However, county-level data are often needed for cancer surveillance and related research.

Methods

To use the large sample sizes of BRFSS and the high response rates and better coverage of NHIS, we applied multilevel models that combined information from both surveys. We also used relevant sources such as census and administrative records. By using these methods, we generated estimates for several cancer risk factors and screening behaviors that are more precise than design-based estimates.

Results

We produced reliable, modeled estimates for 11 outcomes related to smoking and to screening for female breast cancer, cervical cancer, and colorectal cancer. The estimates were produced for 3,112 counties in the United States for the data period from 2008 through 2010.

Conclusion

The modeled estimates corrected for potential noncoverage bias and nonresponse bias in the BRFSS and reduced the variability in NHIS estimates that is attributable to small sample size. The small area estimates produced in this study can serve as a useful resource to the cancer surveillance community.

Cost-Effectiveness and National Effects of Initiating Colorectal Cancer Screening for Average-Risk Persons at Age 45 Years Instead of 50 Years

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The American Cancer Society has recommended initiating colorectal cancer (CRC) screening at age 45 years instead of 50 years. We estimated the cost effectiveness and national effects of adopting this recommendation.

METHODS

We compared screening strategies and alternative resource allocations in a validated Markov model. We based national projections on screening participation rates by age and census data.

RESULTS

Screening colonoscopy initiation at age 45 years instead of 50 years in 1000 persons averted 4 CRCs and 2 CRC deaths, gained 14 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), cost $33,900/QALY gained, and required 758 additional colonoscopies. These 758 colonoscopies could instead be used to screen 231 currently unscreened 55-year-old persons or 342 currently unscreened 65-year-old persons, through age 75 years. These alternatives averted 13-14 CRC cases and 6-7 CRC deaths and gained 27-28 discounted QALYs while saving $163,700-$445,800. Improving colonoscopy completion rates after abnormal results from a fecal immunochemical test yielded greater benefits and savings. Initiation of fecal immunochemical testing at age 45 years instead of 50 years cost $7700/QALY gained. Shifting current age-specific screening rates to 5 years earlier could avert 29,400 CRC cases and 11,100 CRC deaths over the next 5 years but would require 10.7 million additional colonoscopies and cost an incremental $10.4 billion. Improving screening rates to 80% in persons who are 50-75 years old would avert nearly 3-fold more CRC deaths at one third the incremental cost.

CONCLUSIONS

In a Markov model analysis, we found that starting CRC screening at age 45 years is likely to be cost effective. However, greater benefit, at lower cost, could be achieved by increasing participation rates for unscreened older and higher-risk persons.

Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: A review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines are summarized, and the most current data from the National Health Interview Survey are provided on the utilization of cancer screening for men and women and on the adherence of men and women to multiple recommended screening tests.

Barriers and Facilitators to Colorectal Cancer Screening Within a Hispanic Population

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cancer cause of death among US Hispanics. CRC screening among the Hispanic population is lower compared with non-Hispanic Whites.

METHOD

The purpose of this qualitative, exploratory study was to better understand the barriers and facilitators of CRC screening and preference for stool-based testing collection methods among the predominantly Hispanic population of El Paso, Texas. Nine focus groups were conducted by a trained bilingual facilitator with a moderator guide informed by the literature. Transcripts of the focus groups were entered into qualitative analysis software and a thematic network was developed.

RESULTS

Fifty-six participants were recruited: average age was 68.5 years, 58.9% were female, 98.2% were Hispanic, 87.5% had an annual income of less than $20,000, 58.9% had 9th grade education or less, 12.5% had a discount program, and 5.4% had no insurance. Barriers to CRC screening included cost, fear, and embarrassment. Facilitators to screening included in-person health education and physician recommendation. Participants preferred the hygienic nature of a stool test collected with a brush and bottle.

CONCLUSION

Overall, there was a lack of knowledge regarding CRC and significant barriers to CRC screening. A community-based CRC screening program was subsequently developed from our findings.