Breast cancer stage at diagnosis among medically underserved women screened through the Texas Breast and Cervical Cancer Services

Implementation of an Evidence-Based Intervention with Safety Net Clinics to Improve Mammography Appointment Adherence Among Underserved Women

The Peace of Mind Program is an evidence-based intervention to improve mammography appointment adherence in underserved women. The aim of this study was to assess effectiveness of the intervention and implementation of the intervention in safety net clinics. The intervention was implemented through a non-randomized stepped wedge cluster hybrid study design with 19 Federally Qualified Health Centers and charity care clinics within the Greater Houston area. A multivariable generalized estimating equation logistic regression was conducted to examine mammography appointment adherence. A survey assessing Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs was also conducted with clinic staff prior to adoption and eight weeks post implementation. One-sided t-tests were conducted to analyze mean score changes between the surveys. A total of 4402 women (baseline period = 2078; intervention period = 2324) were included in the final regression analysis. Women in the intervention period were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment (OR = 1.30; p < 0.01) than those in the baseline period receiving usual care. Women who completed the intervention were more likely to attend or reschedule their mammography appointment than those who did not complete the intervention (OR = 1.62; p < 0.01). The mammography appointment no-show rates for those in the baseline period, in the intervention period, and who completed the intervention were, respectively, 22%, 19%, and 15%. A total of 15 clinics prior to adoption and eight clinics completed the survey at 8 weeks post implementation A statistically significant mean score decrease was observed in Inner Setting and in two Inner Setting CFIR constructs, Culture-Effort, and Implementation Climate. While the intervention improved mammography appointment adherence, there are opportunities to further integrate Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs. Trial registration: Clinical trials registration number: NCT02296177.

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.

Assessing local capacity to expand rural breast cancer screening and patient navigation: An iterative mixed-method tool

BACKGROUND

Despite federal funding for breast cancer screening, fragmented infrastructure and limited organizational capacity hinder access to the full continuum of breast cancer screening and clinical follow-up procedures among rural-residing women. We proposed a regional hub-and-spoke model, partnering with local providers to expand access across North Texas. We describe development and application of an iterative, mixed-method tool to assess county capacity to conduct community outreach and/or patient navigation in a partnership model.

METHODS

Our tool combined publicly-available quantitative data with qualitative assessments during site visits and semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

Application of our tool resulted in shifts in capacity designation in 10 of 17 county partners: 8 implemented local outreach with hub navigation; 9 relied on the hub for both outreach and navigation. Key factors influencing capacity: (1) formal linkages between partner organizations; (2) inter-organizational relationships; (3) existing clinical service protocols; (4) underserved populations. Qualitative data elucidate how our tool captured these capacity changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our capacity assessment tool enabled the hub to establish partnerships with county organizations by tailoring support to local capacity and needs. Absent a vertically integrated provider network for preventive services in these rural counties, our tool facilitated a virtually integrated regional network to extend access to breast cancer screening to underserved women.

Survival Benefits of Treatment Access Among Underserved Breast Cancer Patients Diagnosed Through the Texas Breast and Cervical Cancer Services Program

PURPOSE

The Texas Breast and Cervical Cancer Services (BCCS) program was established to address socioeconomic disparities in breast and cervical cancer screening and survival. This study examined the impact of the program on treatment and survival of breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed using the Texas Cancer Registry data linked to the BCCS program data. The sample consisted of 40- to 64-year-old women screened and diagnosed with breast cancer through the BCCS program (participants) and similar women living in low socioeconomic status census tracts and diagnosed outside the program (comparison group) during 1995-2008. Regular screeners among the participants were also compared with the comparison group.

RESULTS

Participants had lower rates of breast surgery and higher rates of chemotherapy as compared with the comparison group. Participants undergoing surgery had higher rates of mastectomy (as compared with breast-conserving surgery) and lower rates of adjuvant radiation therapy. Unadjusted survival rates were similar between the participants and the comparison group, and higher among regular screeners, which was primarily driven by stage at diagnosis. Adjusted survival rates were similar between the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there are differences in the types of treatment provided to the participants and the comparison group, there is no evidence of guideline noncompliance or stage-inappropriate treatment provision in either of the groups. Despite being diagnosed with a more advanced stage, the participants had similar unadjusted and adjusted survival rates as the comparison group. Access to timely treatment improved survival and brought the underserved participants on par with the comparison group.

A non-randomized controlled stepped wedge trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multi-level mammography intervention in improving appointment adherence in underserved women

BACKGROUND

Considerable racial and socio-economic disparities exist in breast cancer. In spite of the existence of numerous evidence-based interventions (EBIs) aimed at reducing breast cancer screening barriers among the underserved, there is a lack of uptake or sub-optimal uptake of EBIs in community and clinical settings. This study evaluates a theoretically based, systematically designed implementation strategy to support adoption and implementation of a patient navigation-based intervention, called Peace of Mind Program (PMP), aimed at improving breast cancer screening among underserved women.

METHODS/DESIGN

The PMP will be offered to federally qualified health centers and charity clinics in the Greater Houston area using a non-randomized stepped wedge design. Due to practical constraints of implementing and adopting in the real-world, randomization of start times and blinding will not be used. Any potential confounding or bias will be controlled in the analysis. Outcomes such as appointment adherence, patient referral to diagnostics, time to diagnostic referral, patient referral to treatment, time to treatment referral, and budget impact of the intervention will be assessed. Assessment of constructs from the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) will be assessed during implementation and at the end of the study (sustainment) from each participating clinic. Data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics (chi-square tests) and generalized estimating equations (GEE).

DISCUSSION

While parallel group randomized controlled trials (RCT) are considered the gold standard for evaluating EBI efficacy, withholding an effective EBI in practice can be both unethical and/or impractical. The stepped wedge design addresses this issue by enabling all clinics to eventually receive the EBI during the study and allowing each clinic to serve as its own control, while maintaining strong internal validity. We expect that the PMP will prove to be a feasible and successful strategy for reducing appointment no-shows in underserved women.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02296177.