Method of detection of breast cancer in low-income women

Impact of CBE-based screening program on care pathway, stage at diagnosis, nature of treatment, and overall survival among breast cancer patients in Morocco

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to indirectly examine whether the implementation of clinical breast examination-based screening program in Morocco has been successful in downstaging and improving survival rates. Breast cancer patients detected through the screening pathway were compared with those detected through self-referral over the same period in terms of cancer stage at diagnosis, tumor characteristics, care delays, and survival.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted between April 2019 and August 2020 at two major public oncology centers.

RESULTS

A total of 896 women with confirmed breast cancer were recruited (483 were program-referred and 413 were self-referred). The authors did not report any significant difference between the two groups in terms of stage at diagnosis, molecular profile, or histopathological grade. Early-stage cancer (stage I-II) was detected in 55.7% of self-referred participants compared to 55.5% of program-referred participants. Median intervals between symptom recognition, pathological diagnosis, and treatment initiation were not significantly different between the two groups. Similarly, survival after treatment showed no significant difference between patients screened by the program and self-referred patients. The 3-year survival rate after treatment was 94.5% for patients referred through the program and 88.6% for patients not referred through the program (p = .16).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of equitable and timely access to high-quality diagnosis and treatment facilities, leading to substantial downstaging and enhanced survival rates. Continued efforts to improve quality and expand coverage to include asymptomatic women will consolidate the health infrastructure gains achieved by the Moroccan breast cancer screening program.

The Assessment and Comparison of the Knowledge of Breast Self-Examination and Breast Carcinoma Among Health Care Workers and the General Population in an Urban Setting

Background Breast cancer is one of the common causes of cancer related mortality in women. Early detection and treatment can combat the morbidity and mortality of breast cancer. Most first-world countries have a screening program to facilitate early detection of breast malignancy. A lack of similar programs in developing countries, compounded with ignorance and financial crunch, often leaves women vulnerable due to late detection and complications. Identification of early physical changes in breasts through regular breast self-examination (BSE) can potentially aid in the early detection of breast lumps. Ideally, all women should have access to screening programs, although, practically, it is difficult to achieve mass screening in resource-poor areas. BSE cannot completely bridge this gap in health care; however, it can undoubtedly aid in increased awareness, identification of danger signs, and timely approach to the health care center for intervention. Materials and method A cross-sectional study was conducted at Bharati Vidyapeeth Medical College, Pune, India. The participants were administered a pretested questionnaire to collect information about their understanding of BSE. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) statistical software, Version 25. Mean and frequencies were used to compare participants from various backgrounds. Results The total sample consisted of 1,649 women from various educational backgrounds. Every doctor had heard about BSE compared to 81% of women from the general population; 84% of doctors and less than 40% of women representing the general population were taught to perform BSE; however, only around 34% of all women perform BSE. Women from the general population were largely unaware of the correct age to begin BSE, the frequency of performance, its correlation with the menstrual cycle, and the steps necessary to perform it. Women employed in the health care industry were better informed than the general population but still needed to be aware of BSE's details. Conclusion The study highlighted the lack of information regarding breast malignancy and self-examination among women from all educational and professional backgrounds. Women in the health care sector are better informed about the topic than the general population but still lack adequate information. There is a dire need to train women about the procedure, frequency, and correct time of conducting BSE and the telltale signs of breast carcinoma. Women in the health care industry can be educated and trained as educators on the topic, who can further disseminate the information to the general population to promote early detection of breast malignancy.

The Efficacy of Clinical Breast Exams and Breast Self-Exams in Detecting Malignancy or Positive Ultrasound Findings

Objective

A breast exam is a low-risk, low-cost method for early detection, which is crucial for improved mortality. However, clinical breast exams (CBE) and breast self-exams (BSEs) remain controversial with unclear guidelines. This study analyzes the efficacy of these two exam types in evaluating palpable breast masses.

Methods

This retrospective cross-sectional study included 2019 medical records from Epic of women with breast lumps. Patient demographics, provider types, and breast exam types were recorded. Primary outcomes were detection of cancer and positive ultrasound finding. Fisher’s exact tests and two-sample t-tests determined the statistical significance of the association between the outcomes and categorical and continuous variables.

Results

Of 462 breast masses, 69 demonstrated positive ultrasound findings, with 26 of those yielding cancer; 96% of cancers and 81% of ultrasound findings resulted from patient-identified lumps. Of provider-identified lumps, 100% of cancers and 92.3% of positive ultrasound findings were diagnosed by MDs (doctors of medicine) rather than midlevel providers. There was no statistically significant difference in identifying cancer or positive ultrasound finding between CBEs and BSEs (p = 0.3709 and p = 0.1556).

Conclusion

Despite no difference between CBEs and BSEs in identifying cancer or positive ultrasound finding, 25 of the 26 breast cancers were initially detected by patients, while only one of 26 was detected by CBE. BSEs detect breast cancers. Although some guidelines encourage CBEs over self-exams, not all CBEs are equal.

Key message

There is no significant difference between CBEs and BSEs in identifying cancer or positive ultrasound finding. The majority of cancers were initially identified by patients. BSEs detect breast cancers and women should continue performing them. Not all CBEs are equal. CBEs by MDs, especially women health specialists, are generally more effective than those by midlevel providers.

The Impact of Delays in Low-Income Women's Breast Cancer Experiences

BACKGROUND

Low-income, underinsured and uninsured women are less likely to be diagnosed via mammogram and more often diagnosed at later stages, with a resultant negative impact on survival. The New Jersey Cancer Education and Early Detection Program provides access to cancer screening services for low-income, underinsured and uninsured individuals. This program was recently evaluated, and it was found that enrollees were more likely to be diagnosed at later stages than nonenrollees, which may be related to delays in diagnosis and treatment OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine if there were delays in diagnosis and treatment for program enrollees and, if so, what were the causes of these delays.

METHODS

A qualitative methodology was used incorporating in-depth interviews with 20 women diagnosed with breast cancer through the New Jersey Cancer Education and Early Detection Program. Qualitative content analysis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged: poor access to healthcare, lack of knowledge, and sense of spirituality. Nineteen of 20 women experienced delays in care; 9 were diagnosed with late stage (III or IV) disease.

CONCLUSIONS

While the lack of insurance was a factor, fear, family needs, and a tendency to not prioritize their own health were additional reasons for delays in diagnosis and treatment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Programs such as this are integral to the care of low-income, uninsured individuals. However, such programs are not sufficient to meet the needs of low-income women. The lack of a usual source of care is likely to be a factor in the delays these women experienced.

A 10-Year Evaluation of New Jersey's National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program: Comparison of Stage at Diagnosis in Enrollees and Nonenrollees

Purpose: The New Jersey Cancer Education and Early Detection (NJCEED) program provides breast cancer screening to low income, uninsured, and underinsured women. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the NJCEED program by considering stage at diagnosis for women enrolled in NJCEED compared to women diagnosed in the state of New Jersey who were not enrollees. Materials and Methods: The sample included 47,162 women diagnosed with breast cancer; of those, 1,364 women were NJCEED enrollees. Enrollees were significantly different from nonenrollees in age, race, ethnicity, education, and poverty level. Results: In the logistic regression, NJCEED enrollees had 88.3% higher odds of being diagnosed at a late stage compared with nonenrollees (odds ratio [OR]: 1.883, confidential interval [CI]: 1.678-2.109). African American women had 54.9% higher odds of being diagnosed at a later stage (OR: 1.549, CI: 1.457-1.646). The likelihood of a late stage diagnosis increased as poverty level increased. Conclusion: These results were consistent with other National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program state evaluations, and with evaluations of the national program. Providing a free screening service is not in itself adequate to encourage screening in low-income uninsured women.

A Systematic Review of Barriers and Facilitators to Mammography in American Indian/Alaska Native Women

Introduction: The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the current knowledge of factors that enable or impede American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) women from accessing breast cancer screening. Methodology: A systematic search of MEDLINE and CINAHL databases identified relevant research studies published from 2007 to 2017. Results: Consistent with other low-income populations, socioeconomic factors were related to lower rates of screening in AI/AN women. However, some factors, such as reliance on the Indian Health Service, cultural issues, and traditionality were unique to this population. Discussion: AI/AN women appear to face many of the difficulties that other low-income minority women face in accessing preventive care; however, they may face unique challenges and circumstances in accessing care. Efforts to work with tribes in the development of interventions framed by community-based participatory research are needed to tackle the disparities in the AI/AN community.

Patient and Tumor Disparities in Breast Cancer Based on Insurance Status

This study seeks to determine whether uninsured breast cancer patients are more likely to present with advanced disease relative to insured patients. We retrospectively reviewed newly diagnosed breast cancer patients over a 27-month period. Patients were sorted based on insurance status at diagnosis. Demographic and tumor-specific data were collected and analyzed using non-parametric testing. We identified 276 breast tumors in 260 patients. Out of the 260 patients, 71 patients (27.3%) were uninsured and were more likely to be black (P < 0.05), present with a breast-specific complaint rather than an abnormal mammogram (P < 0.05), and present with more advanced disease (52% stage II or worse vs 26.6% in the insured population; P < 0.01). Percentage of invasive carcinoma and tumor biology were independent of insurance status. Insured patients were more likely to receive surgery as first therapy (76.5 vs 46.0%, P < 0.01), whereas uninsured patients were more likely to receive chemotherapy suggesting multimodality treatment. Uninsured patients had a longer time to therapy initiation (56.0 days vs 44.5 days, P < 0.05). Our study confirms that uninsured patients present with higher stage disease are more likely to have breast-specific complaints and are more likely to require chemotherapy as first-line treatment confirming the under-utility of screening mammography within our uninsured patients.

Practice Bulletin Number 179: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment and Screening in Average-Risk Women

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death in American women (1). Regular screening mammography starting at age 40 years reduces breast cancer mortality in average-risk women (2). Screening, however, also exposes women to harm through false-positive test results and overdiagnosis of biologically indolent lesions. Differences in balancing benefits and harms have led to differences among major guidelines about what age to start, what age to stop, and how frequently to recommend mammography screening in average-risk women (2-4).Breast cancer risk assessment is very important for identifying women who may benefit from more intensive breast cancer surveillance; however, there is no standardized approach to office-based breast cancer risk assessment in the United States. This can lead to missed opportunities to identify women at high risk of breast cancer and may result in applying average-risk screening recommendations to high-risk women. Risk assessment and identification of women at high risk allow for referral to health care providers with expertise in cancer genetics counseling and testing for breast cancer-related germline mutations (eg, BRCA), patient counseling about risk-reduction options, and cascade testing to identify family members who also may be at increased risk.The purpose of this Practice Bulletin is to discuss breast cancer risk assessment, review breast cancer screening guidelines in average-risk women, and outline some of the controversies surrounding breast cancer screening. It will present recommendations for using a framework of shared decision making to assist women in balancing their personal values regarding benefits and harms of screening at various ages and intervals to make personal screening choices from within a range of reasonable options. Recommendations for women at elevated risk and discussion of new technologies, such as tomosynthesis, are beyond the scope of this document and are addressed in other publications of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) (5-7).

Associations between sociodemographic and clinicopathological factors and breast cancer subtypes in a population-based study

PURPOSE

This study examines the factors distinguishing breast cancer (BC) subtypes.

METHODS

We examined subtypes in 629 women with invasive BC, diagnosed from 2006 to 2012, and enrolled in an epidemiological study in New Jersey. Using molecular characteristics from pathology reports, BCs were categorized as luminal A, luminal B, non-luminal HER2-expressing, or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) subtypes. Multinomial logistic models (luminal A as referent) were used to describe BC subtype associations.

RESULTS

Women with luminal B tumors were more likely to be younger at diagnosis [odds ratio (OR) 1.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.0-3.4] and to have higher-grade (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.5-4.7), larger (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.6), and Ki67-positive tumors (OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4.0). Women with non-luminal HER2-expressing BCs were more likely to have higher-grade tumors (OR 14.5, 95% CI 5.3-39.7). Women with TNBCs were more likely to be African-American (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0-3.4) and to have higher-grade (OR 9.7, 95% CI 5.1-18.4), larger (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0-4.8), and Ki67-positive (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.6-5.2) tumors. Notably, compared to the luminal A subtype, luminal B, non-luminal HER2-expressing, and triple-negative subtypes were more frequently self-detected; however, these associations were attenuated in multivariable models.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that some BC subtypes were associated with features denoting more aggressive phenotypes, namely higher grade, larger size, and Ki67 positivity, and possibly patient self-detection among some women. These findings highlight a need for enhanced screening, particularly among younger women, racial/ethnic minorities, and lower socioeconomic subgroups.

Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Symptomatic Breast Cancer Awareness despite a Recent Screen: The Role of Tumor Biology and Mammography Facility Characteristics

BACKGROUND

In a racially and ethnically diverse sample of recently diagnosed urban patients with breast cancer, we examined associations of patient, tumor biology, and mammography facility characteristics on the probability of symptomatic discovery of their breast cancer despite a recent prior screening mammogram.

METHODS

In the Breast Cancer Care in Chicago study, self-reports at interview were used to define patients as having a screen-detected breast cancer or having symptomatic awareness despite a recent screening mammogram (SADRS), in the past 1 or 2 years. Patients with symptomatic breast cancer who did not report a recent prior screen were excluded from these analyses. Characteristics associated with more aggressive disease [estrogen receptor (ER)- and progesterone receptor (PR)-negative status and higher tumor grade] were abstracted from medical records. Mammogram facility characteristics that might indicate aspects of screening quality were defined and controlled for in some analyses.

RESULTS

SADRS was more common among non-Hispanic black and Hispanic than among non-Hispanic white patients (36% and 42% vs. 25%, respectively, P = 0.0004). SADRS was associated with ER/PR-negative and higher-grade disease. Patients screened at sites that relied on dedicated radiologists and sites that were breast imaging centers of excellence were less likely to report SADRS. Tumor and facility factors together accounted for two thirds of the disparity in SADRS (proportion mediated = 70%, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Facility resources and tumor aggressiveness explain much of the racial/ethnic disparity in symptomatic breast cancer among recently screened patients.

IMPACT

A more equitable distribution of high-quality screening would ameliorate but not eliminate this disparity.

Effect of short message service as a reminder on breast self-examination in breast cancer patients: a randomized controlled trial

This study was a single-blind randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of SMS as a reminder for breast self-examination (BSE). Participants who underwent surgery for breast cancer were recruited and randomized to the intervention group or the control group. Subjects in the intervention group received one text message on the first day of every month that reminded them to complete monthly BSE and the other text message on the fifteenth day of every month that contained information about breast cancer. Primary and secondary outcomes were self-reported BSE adherence and the frequency of BSE over 6 months. Between August 2010 and December 2011, 216 patients were randomly assigned to the SMS group (n = 110) or the control group (n = 106). A total of 202 patients were included in the final analysis. Self-reported BSE adherence and the frequency of BSE over the past six months were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group. Multivariate analysis showed that the SMS was the only significant factor for BSE adherence (p < 0.001). The short-term results of our study suggest that SMS is an effective and low-cost method to enhance adherence to BSE with existing information technology infrastructure.

Diagnosis and surgical delays in African American and white women with early-stage breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Delays in diagnosis and treatment for breast cancer may contribute to excess deaths among African Americans. We examined racial differences in delays in diagnosis and surgical treatment for early-stage breast cancer and evaluated race-specific predictors associated with delay.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted among 634 African American and white women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between 2005 and 2010 in New Jersey. Detailed medical-chart abstraction and patient interviews were undertaken. Time intervals were calculated from symptom recognition to diagnosis (diagnosis delay) and from diagnosis to first operation (surgical delay). Binomial regression models were used to examine racial differences in delay and factors associated with ≥2 months delay in the overall population and stratified by race. Reasons responsible for diagnosis delay were also examined by race.

RESULTS

Compared to white women, African American women experienced significantly higher risk of ≥2 months delay in diagnosis and surgical treatment (adjusted relative risks=1.44 (1.12-1.86) and 3.08 (1.88-5.04), respectively). For the African Americans, predictors of diagnosis delay included mode of detection, insurance, and tumor size; for whites, mode of detection and tumor grade. Surgical delay was associated with operation type and education among African Americans but with operation type and tumor size for whites. Patient-related factors were commonly noted as reasons for diagnosis delay.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings emphasize the need to raise further awareness, especially among African American patients and their providers, of the importance of prompt evaluation and treatment of breast abnormalities. Research on effective ways to accomplish this is needed.

Breast and cervical cancer screening patterns among American Indian women at IHS clinics in Montana and Wyoming

OBJECTIVES

We investigated factors associated with primary and secondary breast and cervical cancer screening among American Indian (AI) women receiving care from the Indian Health Service (IHS) in Montana and Wyoming.

METHODS

Rates of primary screening (i.e., screening without evidence of a prior abnormal) and secondary screening during a three-year period (2004-2006) were determined in an age- and clinic-stratified random sample of 1,094 women at six IHS units through medical record review.

RESULTS

Three-year mammography prevalence rates among AI women aged ≥45 years were 37.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.1, 41.3) for primary and 58.7% (95% CI 43.9, 73.5) for secondary screening. Among women aged ≥18 years, three-year Pap test prevalence rates were 37.8% (95% CI 34.9, 40.6) for primary and 53.2% (95% CI 46.0, 60.4) for secondary screening. Primary mammography screening was positively associated with number of visits and receiving care at an IHS hospital (both p<0.001). Primary Pap test screening was inversely associated with age and positively associated with the number of patient visits (both p<0.001). Secondary mammography screening was inversely associated with driving distance to an IHS facility (p=0.035).

CONCLUSION

Our results are consistent with other surveys among AI women, which report that Healthy People 2010 goals for breast (90%) and cervical (70%) cancer screening have not been met. Improvements in breast and cervical cancer screening among AI women attending IHS facilities are needed.

Self-detection remains a key method of breast cancer detection for U.S. women

PURPOSE

The method by which breast cancer is detected becomes a factor for long-term survival and should be considered in treatment plans. This report describes patient characteristics and time trends for various methods of breast cancer detection in the United States.

METHODS

The 2003 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), a nationally representative self-report health survey, included 361 women survivors diagnosed with breast cancer between 1980 and 2003. Responses to the question, How was your breast cancer found? were categorized as accident, self-examination, physician during routine breast examination, mammogram, and other. We examined responses by income, race, age, and year of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Most women survivors (57%) reported a detection method other than mammographic examination. Women often detected breast cancers themselves, either by self-examination (25%) or by accident (18%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased use of screening mammography, a large percentage of breast cancers are detected by the patients themselves. Patient-noted breast abnormalities should be carefully evaluated.

Quality of care for breast cancer for uninsured women in california under the breast and cervical cancer prevention treatment act

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of care provided to uninsured women with breast cancer who received treatment through the Breast and Cervical Cancer Prevention Treatment Program (BCCTP).

METHODS

Participants included women with stage I to III breast cancer (n = 658) from a consecutive sample of women 18 years or older who received coverage through the California BCCTP between February 2003 and September 2005 who consented to a survey and medical record review (61% response rate). Quality of breast cancer care was evaluated using 29 evidence-based quality measures developed for the National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality (NICCQ). NICCQ, a largely insured cohort of women diagnosed with stage I to III breast cancer in 1998, was used to benchmark the results.

RESULTS

Twenty-three percent of women presented with stage III disease compared with fewer than 10% nationally. Patients received 93% of recommended care (95% CI, 92% to 93%). Adherence to recommended care within domains ranged from 87% for post-treatment surveillance (95% CI, 84% to 90%) to 97% for diagnostic evaluation (95% CI, 96% to 97%). Compared to the NICCQ cohort, adherence to quality measures was as good or better for the BCCPT cohort in all domains except post-treatment surveillance.

CONCLUSION

The BCCTP has made important inroads in providing poor, uninsured women with access to high quality care when faced with the diagnosis of breast cancer; however, many present at an advanced stage, which is associated with worse outcomes.