Effect of Time to Diagnostic Testing for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening Abnormalities on Screening Efficacy: A Modeling Study

Predicting the Future by Studying the Past for Patients With Cancer Diagnosed in the Emergency Department

In the article that accompanies this editorial, Kapadia et al. developed a digital quality measure to identify emergency presentations of incident cancers, a measure they found to associated with both antecedent missed opportunities for diagnosis and subsequent 1-year all-cause mortality. Their work highlights the need for a cancer control continuum that includes, not only improved early detection, but also improved symptom recognition, expedited diagnostic work-up, and increased downstream support, including multilevel interventions focused on care continuity and symptom management for these patients with emergency presentations of cancer to improve cancer outcomes.

Breast density knowledge and willingness to delay treatment for pre-operative breast cancer imaging among women with a personal history of breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Following a breast cancer diagnosis, it is uncertain whether women's breast density knowledge influences their willingness to undergo pre-operative imaging to detect additional cancer in their breasts. We evaluated women's breast density knowledge and their willingness to delay treatment for pre-operative testing.

METHODS

We surveyed women identified in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium aged ≥ 18 years, with first breast cancer diagnosed within the prior 6-18 months, who had at least one breast density measurement within the 5 years prior to their diagnosis. We assessed women's breast density knowledge and correlates of willingness to delay treatment for 6 or more weeks for pre-operative imaging via logistic regression.

RESULTS

Survey participation was 28.3% (969/3,430). Seventy-two percent (469/647) of women with dense and 11% (34/322) with non-dense breasts correctly knew their density (p < 0.001); 69% (665/969) of all women knew dense breasts make it harder to detect cancers on a mammogram; and 29% (285/969) were willing to delay treatment ≥ 6 weeks to undergo pre-operative imaging. Willingness to delay treatment did not differ by self-reported density (OR:0.99 for non-dense vs. dense; 95%CI: 0.50-1.96). Treatment with chemotherapy was associated with less willingness to delay treatment (OR:0.67; 95%CI: 0.46-0.96). Having previously delayed breast cancer treatment more than 3 months was associated with an increased willingness to delay treatment for pre-operative imaging (OR:2.18; 95%CI: 1.26-3.77).

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding of personal breast density was not associated with willingness to delay treatment 6 or more weeks for pre-operative imaging, but aspects of a woman's treatment experience were.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV : NCT02980848 registered December 2, 2016.

Lives Saved Through Increasing Adherence to Follow-Up After Abnormal Cervical Cancer Screening Results

OBJECTIVE

To model the potential number of cancers prevented and life-years saved over a range of adherence rates to cervical cancer screening, surveillance follow-up, and follow-up colposcopy that may result from removing financial barriers to these essential clinical services.

METHODS

A previously validated decision-analytic Markov microsimulation model was used to evaluate the increase in adherence to screening, surveillance, and colposcopy after an abnormal cervical cancer screening result. For each incremental increase in adherence, we modeled the number of cervical cancer cases avoided, the stages at which the cancers were detected, the number of cervical cancer deaths avoided, and the number of life-years gained.

RESULTS

Compared with current adherence rates, the model estimated that an optimized scenario of perfect screening, surveillance, and colposcopy adherence per 100,000 women currently eligible for screening in the United States was 128 (95% CI, 66-199) fewer cervical cancers detected (23%), 62 (95% CI, 7-120) fewer cervical cancer deaths (20%), and 2,135 (95% CI, 1,363-3,057) more life-years saved. Sensitivity analysis revealed that any increase in adherence led to clinically meaningful health benefits.

CONCLUSION

The consequences of not attending routine screening or follow-up after an abnormal cervical cancer screening result are associated with preventable cervical cancer morbidity and premature mortality. Given the potential for the removal of consumer cost sharing to increase the use of necessary follow-up after abnormal screening results and to ultimately reduce cervical cancer morbidity and mortality, public and private payers should remove cost barriers to these essential services.

Reducing the Risk of Needle Tract Seeding or Tumor Cell Dissemination during Needle Biopsy Procedures

PURPOSE

Many women fear that breast needle biopsies increase the risk of cancer spread. The purpose of this review article is to discuss the breast cancer literature regarding the risk of needle-biopsy-induced cancer cell displacement and its impact on local and regional recurrence and breast cancer survival.

METHODS

A literature review is performed to discuss the risks and mitigation of needle-biopsy-induced cancer cell displacement.

RESULTS

Needle-biopsy-induced cancer cell displacement is a common event. The risk is influenced by the biopsy technique and the breast cancer type. Evidence suggests that the risk of needle-biopsy-induced cancer cell displacement may potentially increase the odds of local recurrence but has no impact on regional recurrence and long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Technical modifications of needle biopsy procedures can reduce the risk of breast needle-biopsy-induced cancer cell displacement and potentially reduce the risk of local recurrence, especially in patients for whom whole breast radiation is to be omitted.

Data gaps and opportunities for modeling cancer health equity

Population models of cancer reflect the overall US population by drawing on numerous existing data resources for parameter inputs and calibration targets. Models require data inputs that are appropriately representative, collected in a harmonized manner, have minimal missing or inaccurate values, and reflect adequate sample sizes. Data resource priorities for population modeling to support cancer health equity include increasing the availability of data that 1) arise from uninsured and underinsured individuals and those traditionally not included in health-care delivery studies, 2) reflect relevant exposures for groups historically and intentionally excluded across the full cancer control continuum, 3) disaggregate categories (race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, gender, sexual orientation, etc.) and their intersections that conceal important variation in health outcomes, 4) identify specific populations of interest in clinical databases whose health outcomes have been understudied, 5) enhance health records through expanded data elements and linkage with other data types (eg, patient surveys, provider and/or facility level information, neighborhood data), 6) decrease missing and misclassified data from historically underrecognized populations, and 7) capture potential measures or effects of systemic racism and corresponding intervenable targets for change.

Population simulation modeling of disparities in US breast cancer mortality

BACKGROUND

Populations of African American or Black women have persistently higher breast cancer mortality than the overall US population, despite having slightly lower age-adjusted incidence.

METHODS

Three Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network simulation teams modeled cancer mortality disparities between Black female populations and the overall US population. Model inputs used racial group-specific data from clinical trials, national registries, nationally representative surveys, and observational studies. Analyses began with cancer mortality in the overall population and sequentially replaced parameters for Black populations to quantify the percentage of modeled breast cancer morality disparities attributable to differences in demographics, incidence, access to screening and treatment, and variation in tumor biology and response to therapy.

RESULTS

Results were similar across the 3 models. In 2019, racial differences in incidence and competing mortality accounted for a net ‒1% of mortality disparities, while tumor subtype and stage distributions accounted for a mean of 20% (range across models = 13%-24%), and screening accounted for a mean of 3% (range = 3%-4%) of the modeled mortality disparities. Treatment parameters accounted for the majority of modeled mortality disparities: mean = 17% (range = 16%-19%) for treatment initiation and mean = 61% (range = 57%-63%) for real-world effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Our model results suggest that changes in policies that target improvements in treatment access could increase breast cancer equity. The findings also highlight that efforts must extend beyond policies targeting equity in treatment initiation to include high-quality treatment completion. This research will facilitate future modeling to test the effects of different specific policy changes on mortality disparities.

Timing of Colposcopy and Risk of Cervical Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the association between time to colposcopy and risk of subsequent cervical cancer.

METHODS

A longitudinal analysis of patients aged 21-79 years with an abnormal cervical cancer test result from health care systems in Texas, Massachusetts, and Washington was performed. The outcome was a cervical cancer diagnosis 12 months or more after the abnormal result. The primary analysis compared receipt of colposcopy within 3 months (91 days or less) with receipt of colposcopy at 3-12 months (92-365 days) and no colposcopy within 12 months of the abnormal test result; post hoc analyses compared colposcopy within 12 months (365 days or less) with no colposcopy within 12 months. Associations were assessed with multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression controlling for age, risk status, result severity, and health care system.

RESULTS

Of 17,541 patients, 53.3% of patients received colposcopy within 3 months, 22.2% received colposcopy in 3-12 months, and 24.6% had no colposcopy within 12 months. One hundred forty-seven patients were diagnosed with cervical cancer within 12 months and removed from subsequent analyses. Sixty-five patients (0.4%) were diagnosed with cervical cancer more than 1 year (366 days or more) after the abnormal Pap or human papillomavirus test result. The risk of cervical cancer detection more than 1 year after the abnormal test result was not different in patients who received colposcopy within 3-12 months (hazard ratio [HR] 1.07, 95% CI 0.54-2.12) and higher among patients with no colposcopy within 12 months (HR 2.34, 95% CI 1.33-4.14) compared with patients who had colposcopy within 3 months. Post hoc analyses showed that the risk of cervical cancer diagnosis was 2.29-fold higher among those without colposcopy within 12 months compared with those who received colposcopy within 12 months (95% CI 1.37-3.83); among patients with high-grade cytology results, the risk of cervical cancer detection among those without colposcopy within 12 months was 3.12-fold higher compared with those who received colposcopy within 12 months (95% CI 1.47-6.70).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in cervical cancer risk at more than 1 year between patients who received colposcopy within 3 months compared with those who received colposcopy within 3-12 months of an abnormal result. Patients who did not receive colposcopy within 12 months of an abnormal result had a higher risk of subsequent cervical cancer compared with those who received a colposcopy within 12 months.

HPV Testing and its Role in Cervical Cancer Screening

The recognition that persistent infection with carcinogenic human papillomavirus (HPV) is a necessary cause of cervical precancer and cancer has led to the introduction of HPV testing into cervical cancer screening, either as a primary screening test or in conjunction with cervical cytology (i.e., co-testing). HPV testing has much higher sensitivity for detection of cervical precancer and provides greater long-term reassurance if negative compared to cytology. However, most HPV infections are transient, and do not progress to invasive cancer, thus triage tests are required to identify individuals who should be referred to colposcopy for diagnostic evaluation. This chapter begins with a description of the biology, natural history, and epidemiology of HPV as a foundation for understanding the role of HPV in cervical carcinogenesis. This section is followed by a detailed discussion regarding the introduction of HPV-based testing and triage into cervical cancer screening and management. Summarized triage tests include cervical cytology, HPV genotyping, p16/Ki-67 dual stain, and HPV and cellular methylation markers. The final section of this chapter includes an important discussion on cervical cancer disparities, particularly within the United States, followed by concluding remarks.

Breast Cancer Cryoablation in the Multidisciplinary Setting: Practical Guidelines for Patients and Physicians

Breast cancer cryoablation has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to lumpectomy for treating early-stage breast cancer. However, no consensus exists on what should be considered the standard of care for the multidisciplinary management of patients treated with breast cancer cryoablation. In lieu of national guidelines, this review of the literature provides a multidisciplinary framework and an evidence-based discussion of the integration of "standard of care practices" in the comprehensive management of breast cancer cryoablation patients.

Impact and Recovery from COVID-19-Related Disruptions in Colorectal Cancer Screening and Care in the US: A Scenario Analysis

BACKGROUND

Many colorectal cancer-related procedures were suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic. In this study, we predict the impact of resulting delays in screening (colonoscopy, FIT, and sigmoidoscopy) and diagnosis on colorectal cancer-related outcomes, and compare different recovery scenarios.

METHODS

Using the MISCAN-Colon model, we simulated the US population and evaluated different impact and recovery scenarios. Scenarios were defined by the duration and severity of the disruption (percentage of eligible adults affected), the length of delays, and the duration of the recovery. During recovery (6, 12 or 24 months), capacity was increased to catch up missed procedures. Primary outcomes were excess colorectal cancer cases and -related deaths, and additional colonoscopies required during recovery.

RESULTS

With a 24-month recovery, the model predicted that the US population would develop 7,210 (0.18%) excess colorectal cancer cases during 2020-2040, and 6,950 (0.65%) excess colorectal cancer-related deaths, and require 108,500 (8.6%) additional colonoscopies per recovery month, compared with a no-disruption scenario. Shorter recovery periods of 6 and 12 months, respectively, decreased excess colorectal cancer-related deaths to 4,190 (0.39%) and 4,580 (0.43%), at the expense of 260,200-590,100 (20.7%-47.0%) additional colonoscopies per month.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic will likely cause more than 4,000 excess colorectal cancer-related deaths in the US, which could increase to more than 7,000 if recovery periods are longer.

IMPACT

Our results highlight that catching-up colorectal cancer-related services within 12 months provides a good balance between required resources and mitigation of the impact of the disruption on colorectal cancer-related deaths.

Long-term effects of the interruption of the Dutch breast cancer screening program due to COVID-19: A modelling study

Due to COVID-19, the Dutch breast cancer screening program was interrupted for three months with uncertain long-term effects. The aim of this study was to estimate the long-term impact of this interruption on delay in detection, tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers, and interval cancer rate. After validation, the micro-simulation model SiMRiSc was used to calculate the effects of interruption of the breast cancer screening program for three months and for hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months. A scenario without interruption was used as reference. Outcomes considered were tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers and interval cancer rate. Women of 55-59 and 60-64 years old at time of interruption were considered. Uncertainties were estimated using a sensitivity analysis. The three-month interruption had no clinically relevant long-term effect on the tumour size of screen-detected breast cancers. A 19% increase in interval cancer rate was found between last screening before and first screening after interruption compared to no interruption. Hypothetical interruptions of six and twelve months resulted in larger increases in interval cancer rate of 38% and 78% between last screening before and first screening after interruption, respectively, and an increase in middle-sized tumours in first screening after interruption of 26% and 47%, respectively. In conclusion, the interruption of the Dutch screening program is not expected to result in a long-term delay in detection or clinically relevant change in tumour size of screen-detected cancers, but only affects the interval cancer rate between last screening before and first screening after interruption.

New approach to implement cancer patient care: The valutazione percorso rete oncologica campana (ValPeROC)‐experience from an Italian oncology network

OBJECTIVE

The primary goal of the Campania Oncology Network (ROC) was to reduce cancer delay and care fragmentation through the establishment of cancer-specific multidisciplinary oncologic groups (GOMs) and diagnostic and therapeutic assistance paths (PDTAs).

METHODS

Five cancer centres of the ROC, with their own cancer specific GOM, were selected. In our analysis, we have focused on four neoplasms: lung, colon, ovarian and prostate cancers. The median time for pre-GOM and GOM Times was calculated for each tumour site. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed to individuate risk factors for pre-GOM and GOM Time.

RESULTS

Significant differences were observed for prostate cancer compared to other patients either for pre-GOM or GOM Times. Significant risks were found for ovarian and prostate cancers in pre-GOM time and for prostate cancer in GOM-Time.

CONCLUSIONS

This experience will produce knowledge and data to guide decision-making and to manage more effectively the challenges of fighting cancer in Campania region. The Valutazione Percorso Rete Oncologica Campana (ValPeROC) study evaluates, for the first time, the ROC activity, through the analysis of key performance indices. Pre-GOM and GOM Time represent the quality of the entire regional health system and are useful to define models, which can evaluate the performance of the ROC over time.

Evaluating and Improving Cancer Screening Process Quality in a Multilevel Context: The PROSPR II Consortium Design and Research Agenda

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening is a complex process involving multiple steps and levels of influence (e.g., patient, provider, facility, health care system, community, or neighborhood). We describe the design, methods, and research agenda of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium. PROSPR II Research Centers (PRC), and the Coordinating Center aim to identify opportunities to improve screening processes and reduce disparities through investigation of factors affecting cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening in U.S. community health care settings.

METHODS

We collected multilevel, longitudinal cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening process data from clinical and administrative sources on &gt;9 million racially and ethnically diverse individuals across 10 heterogeneous health care systems with cohorts beginning January 1, 2010. To facilitate comparisons across organ types and highlight data breadth, we calculated frequencies of multilevel characteristics and volumes of screening and diagnostic tests/procedures and abnormalities.

RESULTS

Variations in patient, provider, and facility characteristics reflected the PROSPR II health care systems and differing target populations. PRCs identified incident diagnoses of invasive cancers, in situ cancers, and precancers (invasive: 372 cervical, 24,131 colorectal, 11,205 lung; in situ: 911 colorectal, 32 lung; precancers: 13,838 cervical, 554,499 colorectal).

CONCLUSIONS

PROSPR II's research agenda aims to advance: (i) conceptualization and measurement of the cancer screening process, its multilevel factors, and quality; (ii) knowledge of cancer disparities; and (iii) evaluation of the COVID-19 pandemic's initial impacts on cancer screening. We invite researchers to collaborate with PROSPR II investigators.

IMPACT

PROSPR II is a valuable data resource for cancer screening researchers.

Multilevel Factors Associated With Time to Biopsy After Abnormal Screening Mammography Results by Race and Ethnicity

Importance

Diagnostic delays in breast cancer detection may be associated with later-stage disease and higher anxiety, but data on multilevel factors associated with diagnostic delay are limited.

Objective

To evaluate individual-, neighborhood-, and health care-level factors associated with differences in time from abnormal screening to biopsy among racial and ethnic groups.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This prospective cohort study used data from women aged 40 to 79 years who had abnormal results in screening mammograms conducted in 109 imaging facilities across 6 US states between 2009 and 2019. Data were analyzed from February 21 to November 4, 2021.

Exposures

Individual-level factors included self-reported race and ethnicity, age, family history of breast cancer, breast density, previous breast biopsy, and time since last mammogram; neighborhood-level factors included geocoded education and income based on residential zip codes and rurality; and health care-level factors included mammogram modality, screening facility academic affiliation, and facility onsite biopsy service availability. Data were also assessed by examination year.

Main Outcome and Measures

The main outcome was unadjusted and adjusted relative risk (RR) of no biopsy within 30, 60, and 90 days using sequential log-binomial regression models. A secondary outcome was unadjusted and adjusted median time to biopsy using accelerated failure time models.

Results

A total of 45 186 women (median [IQR] age at screening, 56 [48-65] years) with 46 185 screening mammograms with abnormal results were included. Of screening mammograms with abnormal results recommended for biopsy, 15 969 (34.6%) were not resolved within 30 days, 7493 (16.2%) were not resolved within 60 days, and 5634 (12.2%) were not resolved within 90 days. Compared with White women, there was increased risk of no biopsy within 30 and 60 days for Asian (30 days: RR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.31-2.10; 60 days: RR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.15-2.18), Black (30 days: RR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.30-1.78; 60 days: 1.39; 95% CI, 1.22-1.60), and Hispanic (30 days: RR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.24-1.81; 60 days: 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71) women; however, the unadjusted risk of no biopsy within 90 days only persisted significantly for Black women (RR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11-1.47). Sequential adjustment for selected individual-, neighborhood-, and health care-level factors, exclusive of screening facility, did not substantially change the risk of no biopsy within 90 days for Black women (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.12-1.44). After additionally adjusting for screening facility, the increased risk for Black women persisted but showed a modest decrease (RR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.08-1.34).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study involving a diverse cohort of US women recommended for biopsy after abnormal results on screening mammography, Black women were the most likely to experience delays to diagnostic resolution after adjusting for multilevel factors. These results suggest that adjustment for multilevel factors did not entirely account for differences in time to breast biopsy, but unmeasured factors, such as systemic racism and other health care system factors, may impact timely diagnosis.

The impact of cumulative colorectal cancer screening delays: A simulation study

OBJECTIVE

Annual fecal immunochemical tests can reduce colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. However, screening is a multi-step process and most patients do not perfectly adhere to guideline-recommended screening schedules. Our objective was to compare the reduction in colorectal cancer incidence and life-years gained based on US guideline-concordant fecal immunochemical test screening to scenarios with a range of delays.

METHOD

The Colorectal Cancer Simulated Population model for Incidence and Natural history (CRC-SPIN) microsimulation model was used to estimate the effect of systematic departures from fecal immunochemical test screening guidelines on lifetime screening benefit.

RESULTS

The combined effect of consistent modest delays in screening initiation (1 year), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (3 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (3 months) resulted in up to 1.3 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 0.4 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 154.7 fewer life-years gained per 10,000. A 5-year delay in screening initiation had a larger impact on screening effectiveness than consistent small delays in repeated fecal immunochemical test screening or receipt of follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal fecal immunochemical test. The combined effect of consistent large delays in screening initiation (5 years), repeated fecal immunochemical test screening (6 months), and receipt of follow-up or surveillance colonoscopy (6 months) resulted in up to 3.7 additional colorectal cancer cases per 10,000, 1.5 additional late-stage colorectal cancer cases per 10,000 and 612.3 fewer life-years gained per 10,000.

CONCLUSIONS

Systematic delays across the screening process can result in meaningful reductions in colorectal cancer screening effectiveness, especially for longer delays. Screening delays could drive differences in colorectal cancer incidence across patient groups with differential access to screening.

Prioritisation of colonoscopy services in colorectal cancer screening programmes to minimise impact of COVID-19 pandemic on predicted cancer burden: A comparative modelling study

Objectives

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening with a faecal immunochemical test (FIT) has been disrupted in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. Performing catch-up of missed screens while maintaining regular screening services requires additional colonoscopy capacity that may not be available. This study aimed to compare strategies that clear the screening backlog using limited colonoscopy resources.

Methods

A range of strategies were simulated using four country-specific CRC natural-history models: Adenoma and Serrated pathway to Colorectal CAncer (ASCCA) and MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis for CRC (MISCAN-Colon) (both in the Netherlands), Policy1-Bowel (Australia) and OncoSim (Canada). Strategies assumed a 3-month screening disruption with varying recovery period lengths (6, 12, and 24 months) and varying FIT thresholds for diagnostic colonoscopy. Increasing the FIT threshold reduces the number of referrals to diagnostic colonoscopy. Outcomes for each strategy were colonoscopy demand and excess CRC-related deaths due to the disruption.

Results

Performing catch-up using the regular FIT threshold in 6, 12 and 24 months could prevent most excess CRC-related deaths, but required 50%, 25% and 12.5% additional colonoscopy demand, respectively. Without exceeding usual colonoscopy demand, up to 60% of excess CRC-related deaths can be prevented by increasing the FIT threshold for 12 or 24 months. Large increases in FIT threshold could lead to additional deaths rather than preventing them.

Conclusions

Clearing the screening backlog in 24 months could avert most excess CRC-related deaths due to a 3-month disruption but would require a small increase in colonoscopy demand. Increasing the FIT threshold slightly over 24 months could ease the pressure on colonoscopy resources.

Impact of COVID-19 on cervical cancer screening: Challenges and opportunities to improving resilience and reduce disparities

The COVID-19 pandemic has a major impact on a wide range of health outcomes. Disruptions of elective health services related to cervical screening, management of abnormal screening test results, and treatment of precancers, may lead to increases in cervical cancer incidence and exacerbate existing health disparities. Modeling studies suggest that a short delay of cervical screening in subjects with previously negative HPV results has minor effects on cancer outcomes, while delay of management and treatment can lead to larger increases in cervical cancer. Several approaches can mitigate the effects of disruption of cervical screening and management. HPV-based screening has higher accuracy compared to cytology, and a negative HPV result provides longer reassurance against cervical cancer; further, HPV testing can be conducted from self-collected specimens. Self-collection expands the reach of screening to underserved populations who currently do not participate in screening. Self-collection and can also provide alternative screening approaches during the pandemic because testing can be supported by telehealth and specimens collected in the home, substantially reducing patient-provider contact and risk of COVID-19 exposure, and also expanding the reach of catch-up services to address backlogs of screening tests that accumulated during the pandemic. Risk-based management allows prioritizing management of patients at highest risk of cervical cancer while extending screening intervals for those at lowest risk. The pandemic provides important lessons for how to make cervical screening more resilient to disruptions and how to reduce cervical cancer disparities that may be exacerbated due to disruptions of health services.

Measuring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on organized cancer screening and diagnostic follow-up care in Ontario, Canada: A provincial, population-based study

It is essential to quantify the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer screening, including for vulnerable sub-populations, to inform the development of evidence-based, targeted pandemic recovery strategies. We undertook a population-based retrospective observational study in Ontario, Canada to assess the impact of the pandemic on organized cancer screening and diagnostic services, and assess whether patterns of cancer screening service use and diagnostic delay differ across population sub-groups during the pandemic. Provincial health databases were used to identify age-eligible individuals who participated in one or more of Ontario's breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening programs from January 1, 2019-December 31, 2020. Ontario's screening programs delivered 951,000 (-41%) fewer screening tests in 2020 than in 2019 and volumes for most programs remained more than 20% below historical levels by the end of 2020. A smaller percentage of cervical screening participants were older (50-59 and 60-69 years) during the pandemic when compared with 2019. Individuals in the oldest age groups and in lower-income neighborhoods were significantly more likely to experience diagnostic delay following an abnormal breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer screening test during the pandemic, and individuals with a high probability of living on a First Nation reserve were significantly more likely to experience diagnostic delay following an abnormal fecal test. Ongoing monitoring and management of backlogs must continue. Further evaluation is required to identify populations for whom access to cancer screening and diagnostic care has been disproportionately impacted and quantify impacts of these service disruptions on cancer incidence, stage, and mortality. This information is critical to pandemic recovery efforts that are aimed at achieving equitable and timely access to cancer screening-related care.

The Future of Endoscopic Operations After the Coronavirus Pandemic

The unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic and its rapid global shutdowns have posed tremendous challenges for GI practices, including sudden delays in endoscopic procedures. As full reopening approaches, practices are wrestling with completely retooling their operations to ensure the resumption of high-quality, safe, and effective patient care. The pandemic's long-term effects on practice operations must be assessed: What will postpandemic GI care look like? Will some aspects of our work be changed forever, and if so, what are the practice management implications? This chapter surveys the pandemic's impact on US-based GI practices and discusses key "lessons learned" for future operations.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Colorectal Cancer Screening Delay: Effect on Stage Shift and Increased Mortality

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic had a sudden, dramatic impact on healthcare. In Italy, since the beginning of the pandemic, colorectal cancer (CRC) screening programs have been forcefully suspended. We aimed to evaluate whether screening procedure delays can affect the outcomes of CRC screening.

METHODS

We built a procedural model considering delays in the time to colonoscopy and estimating the effect on mortality due to up-stage migration of patients. The number of expected CRC cases was computed by using the data of the Italian screened population. Estimates of the effects of delay to colonoscopy on CRC stage, and of stage on mortality were assessed by a meta-analytic approach.

RESULTS

With a delay of 0-3 months, 74% of CRC is expected to be stage I-II, while with a delay of 4-6 months there would be a 2%-increase for stage I-II and a concomitant decrease for stage III-IV (P = .068). Compared to baseline (0-3 months), moderate (7-12 months) and long (> 12 months) delays would lead to a significant increase in advanced CRC (from 26% to 29% and 33%, respectively; P = .008 and P < .001, respectively). We estimated a significant increase in the total number of deaths (+12.0%) when moving from a 0-3-months to a >12-month delay (P = .005), and a significant change in mortality distribution by stage when comparing the baseline with the >12-months (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Screening delays beyond 4-6 months would significantly increase advanced CRC cases, and also mortality if lasting beyond 12 months. Our data highlight the need to reorganize efforts against high-impact diseases such as CRC, considering possible future waves of SARS-CoV-2 or other pandemics.

Reflecting on 20 years of breast cancer modeling in CISNET: Recommendations for future cancer systems modeling efforts

Since 2000, the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET) modeling teams have developed and applied microsimulation and statistical models of breast cancer. Here, we illustrate the use of collaborative breast cancer multilevel systems modeling in CISNET to demonstrate the flexibility of systems modeling to address important clinical and policy-relevant questions. Challenges and opportunities of future systems modeling are also summarized. The 6 CISNET breast cancer models embody the key features of systems modeling by incorporating numerous data sources and reflecting tumor, person, and health system factors that change over time and interact to affect the burden of breast cancer. Multidisciplinary modeling teams have explored alternative representations of breast cancer to reveal insights into breast cancer natural history, including the role of overdiagnosis and race differences in tumor characteristics. The models have been used to compare strategies for improving the balance of benefits and harms of breast cancer screening based on personal risk factors, including age, breast density, polygenic risk, and history of Down syndrome or a history of childhood cancer. The models have also provided evidence to support the delivery of care by simulating outcomes following clinical decisions about breast cancer treatment and estimating the relative impact of screening and treatment on the United States population. The insights provided by the CISNET breast cancer multilevel modeling efforts have informed policy and clinical guidelines. The 20 years of CISNET modeling experience has highlighted opportunities and challenges to expanding the impact of systems modeling. Moving forward, CISNET research will continue to use systems modeling to address cancer control issues, including modeling structural inequities affecting racial disparities in the burden of breast cancer. Future work will also leverage the lessons from team science, expand resource sharing, and foster the careers of early stage modeling scientists to ensure the sustainability of these efforts.

Since 2000, our research teams have used computer models of breast cancer to address important clinical and policy-relevant questions as part of the National Cancer Institute’s Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network (CISNET). Our 6 CISNET breast cancer models embody the key features of systems modeling by incorporating numerous data sources and reflecting tumor, person, and health system factors that change over time and interact to represent the burden of breast cancer. We have used our models to investigate questions related to breast cancer biology, compare strategies to improve the balance of benefits and harms of screening mammography, and support insights into the delivery of care by modeling outcomes following clinical decisions about breast cancer treatment. Moving forward, our research will continue to use systems modeling to address issues related to reducing the burden of breast cancer including modeling structural inequities affecting racial disparities. Our future work will also leverage lessons from engaging multidisciplinary scientific teams, expand efforts to share modeling resources with other researchers, and foster the careers of early stage modeling scientists to ensure the sustainability of these efforts.

The impact of episodic screening interruption: COVID-19 and population-based cancer screening in Canada

BACKGROUND

Population-based cancer screening can reduce cancer burden but was interrupted temporarily due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We estimated the long-term clinical impact of breast and colorectal cancer screening interruptions in Canada using a validated mathematical model.

METHODS

We used the OncoSim breast and colorectal cancers microsimulation models to explore scenarios of primary screening stops for 3, 6, and 12 months followed by 6-24-month transition periods of reduced screening volumes. For breast cancer, we estimated changes in cancer incidence over time, additional advanced-stage cases diagnosed, and excess cancer deaths in 2020-2029. For colorectal cancer, we estimated changes in cancer incidence over time, undiagnosed advanced adenomas and colorectal cancers in 2020, and lifetime excess cancer incidence and deaths.

RESULTS

Our simulations projected a surge of cancer cases when screening resumes. For breast cancer screening, a three-month interruption could increase cases diagnosed at advanced stages (310 more) and cancer deaths (110 more) in 2020-2029. A six-month interruption could lead to 670 extra advanced cancers and 250 additional cancer deaths. For colorectal cancers, a six-month suspension of primary screening could increase cancer incidence by 2200 cases with 960 more cancer deaths over the lifetime. Longer interruptions, and reduced volumes when screening resumes, would further increase excess cancer deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Interruptions in cancer screening will lead to additional cancer deaths, additional advanced cancers diagnosed, and a surge in demand for downstream resources when screening resumes. An effective strategy is needed to minimize potential harm to people who missed their screening.

Prioritisation by FIT to mitigate the impact of delays in the 2-week wait colorectal cancer referral pathway during the COVID-19 pandemic: a UK modelling study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of faecal immunochemical testing (FIT) prioritisation to mitigate the impact of delays in the colorectal cancer (CRC) urgent diagnostic (2-week-wait (2WW)) pathway consequent from the COVID-19 pandemic.

DESIGN

We modelled the reduction in CRC survival and life years lost resultant from per-patient delays of 2-6 months in the 2WW pathway. We stratified by age group, individual-level benefit in CRC survival versus age-specific nosocomial COVID-19-related fatality per referred patient undergoing colonoscopy. We modelled mitigation strategies using thresholds of FIT triage of 2, 10 and 150 µg Hb/g to prioritise 2WW referrals for colonoscopy. To construct the underlying models, we employed 10-year net CRC survival for England 2008-2017, 2WW pathway CRC case and referral volumes and per-day-delay HRs generated from observational studies of diagnosis-to-treatment interval.

RESULTS

Delay of 2/4/6 months across all 11 266 patients with CRC diagnosed per typical year via the 2WW pathway were estimated to result in 653/1419/2250 attributable deaths and loss of 9214/20 315/32 799 life years. Risk-benefit from urgent investigatory referral is particularly sensitive to nosocomial COVID-19 rates for patients aged >60. Prioritisation out of delay for the 18% of symptomatic referrals with FIT >10 µg Hb/g would avoid 89% of these deaths attributable to presentational/diagnostic delay while reducing immediate requirement for colonoscopy by >80%.

CONCLUSIONS

Delays in the pathway to CRC diagnosis and treatment have potential to cause significant mortality and loss of life years. FIT triage of symptomatic patients in primary care could streamline access to colonoscopy, reduce delays for true-positive CRC cases and reduce nosocomial COVID-19 mortality in older true-negative 2WW referrals. However, this strategy offers benefit only in short-term rationalisation of limited endoscopy services: the appreciable false-negative rate of FIT in symptomatic patients means most colonoscopies will still be required.

Time to Colonoscopy After Abnormal Stool-Based Screening and Risk for Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal time interval for diagnostic colonoscopy completion after an abnormal stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening test is uncertain. We examined the association between time to colonoscopy and CRC outcomes among individuals who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy after abnormal stool-based screening.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of veterans age 50 to 75 years with an abnormal fecal occult blood test (FOBT) or fecal immunochemical test (FIT) between 1999 and 2010. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards to generate CRC-specific incidence and mortality hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for 3-month colonoscopy intervals, with 1 to 3 months as the reference group. Association of time to colonoscopy with late-stage CRC diagnosis was also examined.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 204,733 patients. Mean age was 61 years (SD 6.9). Compared with patients who received a colonoscopy at 1 to 3 months, there was an increased CRC risk for patients who received a colonoscopy at 13 to 15 months (HR 1.13; 95% CI 1.00-1.27), 16 to 18 months (HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.10-1.43), 19 to 21 months (HR 1.28; 95% CI: 1.11-1.48), and 22 to 24 months (HR 1.26; 95% CI 1.07-1.47). Compared with patients who received a colonoscopy at 1 to 3 months, mortality risk was higher in groups who received a colonoscopy at 19 to 21 months (HR 1.52; 95% CI 1.51-1.99) and 22 to 24 months (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.03-1.88). Odds for late-stage CRC increased at 16 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased time to colonoscopy is associated with higher risk of CRC incidence, death, and late-stage CRC after abnormal FIT/FOBT. Interventions to improve CRC outcomes should emphasize diagnostic follow-up within 1 year of an abnormal FIT/FOBT result.

Effects of cancer screening restart strategies after COVID-19 disruption

BACKGROUND

Many breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening programmes were disrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to estimate the effects of five restart strategies after the disruption on required screening capacity and cancer burden.

METHODS

Microsimulation models simulated five restart strategies for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening. The models estimated required screening capacity, cancer incidence, and cancer-specific mortality after a disruption of 6 months. The restart strategies varied in whether screens were caught up or not and, if so, immediately or delayed, and whether the upper age limit was increased.

RESULTS

The disruption in screening programmes without catch-up of missed screens led to an increase of 2.0, 0.3, and 2.5 cancer deaths per 100 000 individuals in 10 years in breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. Immediately catching-up missed screens minimised the impact of the disruption but required a surge in screening capacity. Delaying screening, but still offering all screening rounds gave the best balance between required capacity, incidence, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Strategies with the smallest loss in health effects were also the most burdensome for the screening organisations. Which strategy is preferred depends on the organisation and available capacity in a country.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands: a comparative modelling study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening programmes worldwide have been disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the impact of hypothetical disruptions to organised faecal immunochemical test-based colorectal cancer screening programmes on short-term and long-term colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in three countries using microsimulation modelling.

METHODS

In this modelling study, we used four country-specific colorectal cancer microsimulation models-Policy1-Bowel (Australia), OncoSim (Canada), and ASCCA and MISCAN-Colon (the Netherlands)-to estimate the potential impact of COVID-19-related disruptions to screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality in Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands annually for the period 2020-24 and cumulatively for the period 2020-50. Modelled scenarios varied by duration of disruption (3, 6, and 12 months), decreases in screening participation after the period of disruption (0%, 25%, or 50% reduction), and catch-up screening strategies (within 6 months after the disruption period or all screening delayed by 6 months).

FINDINGS

Without catch-up screening, our analysis predicted that colorectal cancer deaths among individuals aged 50 years and older, a 3-month disruption would result in 414-902 additional new colorectal cancer diagnoses (relative increase 0·1-0·2%) and 324-440 additional deaths (relative increase 0·2-0·3%) in the Netherlands, 1672 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 979 additional deaths (relative increase 0·5%) in Australia, and 1671 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2%) and 799 additional deaths (relative increase 0·3%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 6-month disruption would result in 803-1803 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·2-0·4%) and 678-881 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4-0·6%) in the Netherlands, 3552 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 1961 additional deaths (relative increase 1·0%) in Australia, and 2844 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·3%) and 1319 additional deaths (relative increase 0·4%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. A 12-month disruption would result in 1619-3615 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·4-0·9%) and 1360-1762 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8-1·2%) in the Netherlands, 7140 additional diagnoses (relative increase 1·2%) and 3968 additional deaths (relative increase 2·0%) in Australia, and 5212 additional diagnoses (relative increase 0·6%) and 2366 additional deaths (relative increase 0·8%) in Canada between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening. Providing immediate catch-up screening could minimise the impact of the disruption, restricting the relative increase in colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 to less than 0·1% in all countries. A post-disruption decrease in participation could increase colorectal cancer incidence by 0·2-0·9% and deaths by 0·6-1·6% between 2020 and 2050, compared with undisrupted screening.

INTERPRETATION

Although the projected effect of short-term disruption to colorectal cancer screening is modest, such disruption will have a marked impact on colorectal cancer incidence and deaths between 2020 and 2050 attributable to missed screening. Thus, it is crucial that, if disrupted, screening programmes ensure participation rates return to previously observed rates and provide catch-up screening wherever possible, since this could mitigate the impact on colorectal cancer deaths.

FUNDING

Cancer Council New South Wales, Health Canada, and Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environment.

Association Between Time to Colonoscopy After Positive Fecal Testing and Colorectal Cancer Outcomes: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colonoscopy is required following a positive fecal screening test for colorectal cancer (CRC). It remains unclear to what extent time to colonoscopy is associated with CRC-related outcomes. We performed a systematic review to elucidate this relationship.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed through April 2020 for studies reporting associations between time from positive fecal testing to colonoscopy and outcomes including CRC incidence (primary outcome), CRC stage at diagnosis, and/or CRC-specific mortality. Our primary objective was to quantify these relationships following positive fecal immunochemical testing (FIT). Two authors independently performed screening, abstraction, and risk of bias assessments.

RESULTS

From 1,612 initial studies, 8 were included in the systematic review, with 5 reporting outcomes for FIT. Although meta-analysis was not possible, consistent trends between longer time delays and worse outcomes were apparent in all studies. Colonoscopy performed beyond 9 months from positive FIT compared to within 1 month was significantly associated with a higher incidence of CRC, with adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of 1.75 and 1.48 in the two largest studies. These studies also reported significant associations between colonoscopy performed beyond 9 months and higher incidence of advanced stage CRC (stage III or IV) at diagnosis, with AORs of 2.79 and 1.55, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Colonoscopy for positive FIT should not be delayed beyond 9 months. Given the additional time required for urgent referrals and surgical planning for CRC, colonoscopy should ideally be performed well in advance of 9 months following a positive FIT.

Time to colonoscopy for patients accessing the direct access colonoscopy service compared to the normal service in Newcastle, Australia

BACKGROUND

The 2017 National Bowel Cancer Screening Program report records a median time from positive faecal occult blood test to colonoscopy of 53 days. There is some intrinsic delay in accessing specialist medical opinion prior to colonoscopy.

AIM

To examine the effect of the introduction of a Direct Access Colonoscopy Service (DACS).

METHODS

Using prospectively maintained databases, patients undergoing normal service (NS) colonoscopy and those referred to DACS were compared. The primary outcome measure was the time from general practitioner (GP) referral to colonoscopy. Secondary outcome measures included the proportion of patients who met the current recommended 30 days from GP referral to colonoscopy, and the proportion of patients who waited longer than 90 days.

RESULTS

There were 289 patients in the NS group, and 601 patients who progressed on the DACS pathway. The demographics of both groups were comparable. DACS patients had a median waiting time of 49 days, significantly shorter than NS patients whose median wait was 79 days (P < 0.0001). Approximately 15.1% patients in the DACS group had their colonoscopy within 30 days from GP referral, significantly better than in the NS group (4.5%, P < 0.001). In the NS group, 41.2% patients waited longer than 90 days from GP referral to colonoscopy, compared with 16.3% in the DACS group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

DACS reduces waiting times to colonoscopy and is associated with an increased proportion of patients undergoing colonoscopy in a timely manner.

Delayed Colonoscopy Following a Positive Fecal Test Result and Cancer Mortality

Background

A fecal test followed by diagnostic colonoscopy for a positive result is a widely endorsed screening strategy for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the relationship between the time delay from the positive test to the follow-up colonoscopy and CRC mortality has not been established.

Methods

From a population-based screening program, we identified CRC patients newly diagnosed from 2005 through 2015 by a positive fecal occult test followed by a colonoscopy. The primary outcome measure was CRC-specific mortality according to four categories for the time elapsed between the positive result and the subsequent colonoscopy.

Results

The 1749 patients underwent colonoscopies within 0–3 months (n = 981, 56.1%), 4–6 months (n = 307, 17.5%), 7–12 months (n = 157, 9.0%), and later than 12 months (n = 304, 17.4%). CRC-specific deaths according to exposure groups were: 13.8% (135 of 981) for 0–3 months, 10.7% (33 of 307) for 4–6 months (crude hazards ratio [HR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.51 to 1.14), 11.5% (18 of 157) for 7–12 months (crude HR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.51 to 1.42), and 22.7% (69 of 304) for longer than 12 months (crude HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.90). The only variable that was associated with mortality risk was the number of positive slides (P = .003). High positivity was twice the value in the 0–3 as the longer-than-12 months group: 51.9% vs 25.0% and similar for the 4–6 and 7–12 months groups (38.1% and 36.5%), respectively. The adjusted HRs for CRC mortality were 0.81 (95% CI = 0.55 to 1.19); 0.83 (95% CI = 0.50 to 1.41), and 1.53 (95% CI = 1.13 to 2.12, P = .006) for the 4–12, 7–12, and longer-than-12-months groups, respectively, compared with the shortest delay group.

Conclusions

Among screen-diagnosed CRC patients, performance of colonoscopy more than 12 months after the initial positive fecal occult blood test was associated with more advanced disease and higher mortality due to CRC.

Time to Follow-up After Colorectal Cancer Screening by Health Insurance Type

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that patients with Medicaid insurance or Medicaid-like coverage would have longer times to follow-up and be less likely to complete colonoscopy compared with patients with commercial insurance within the same healthcare systems.

METHODS

A total of 35,009 patients aged 50-64years with a positive fecal immunochemical test were evaluated in Northern and Southern California Kaiser Permanente systems and in a North Texas safety-net system between 2011 and 2012. Kaplan-Meier estimation was used between 2016 and 2017 to calculate the probability of having follow-up colonoscopy by coverage type. Among Kaiser Permanente patients, Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% CIs for the association between coverage type and receipt of follow-up, adjusting for sociodemographics and health status.

RESULTS

Even within the same integrated system with organized follow-up, patients with Medicaid were 24% less likely to complete follow-up as those with commercial insurance. Percentage receiving colonoscopy within 3 months after a positive fecal immunochemical test was 74.6% for commercial insurance, 63.10% for Medicaid only, and 37.5% for patients served by the integrated safety-net system.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that patients with Medicaid were less likely than those with commercial insurance to complete follow-up colonoscopy after a positive fecal immunochemical test and had longer average times to follow-up. With the future of coverage mechanisms uncertain, it is important and timely to assess influences of health insurance coverage on likelihood of follow-up colonoscopy and identify potential disparities in screening completion.

Population-based e-records to evaluate HPV triage of screen-detected atypical squamous cervical lesions in Catalonia, Spain, 2010-15

Equivocal lesions (ASC-US) are common abnormalities in cervical cancer screening exams. HPV testing helps to stratify the risk of progression to high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions or more (HSIL+). Population-based medical electronic data can be used to evaluate screening recommendations. The study uses routine electronic data from primary health centers to estimate the impact of HPV testing in a 3- and a 5-year risk of HSIL+ after an ASC-US. The study includes data derived from medical electronic information from 85,775 women who first attended a cervical cancer screening visit at the National Health System facilities of Catalonia, Spain, during 2010-11 and followed up to 2015. Included women were aged between 25-65 years old, having at least one follow-up visit, and a cervical cytology of ASC-US (N = 1,647). Women with a first result of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (LSIL) (N = 945) or those with negative cytology (N = 83,183) were included for comparison. Those with a baseline HSIL+ were excluded. Incident HSIL+ was evaluated by means of Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariate regression models. HPV test results were available for 63.4% of women with a baseline ASC-US. Among all ASC-US, 70 incident HSIL+ were identified at 5 years. ASC-US HPV positive women had a high risk of HSIL+ compared to women with negative cytology (adjusted HR = 32.7; 95% CI: 23.6-45.2) and a similar risk to women with baseline LSIL (HR = 29.3; 95% CI: 22.4-38.2), whereas ASC-US HPV negative women had no differential risk to that observed in baseline negative cytology. Women with ASC-US and no HPV test had an average HSIL+ risk (HR = 14.8; 95% CI: 9.7-22.5). Population-based e-medical records derived from primary health care centers allowed monitoring of screening recommendations, providing robust estimates for the study outcomes. This analysis confirms that HPV testing improved risk stratification of ASC-US lesions. The information can be used to improve diagnosis and management of screen detected lesions.

Mammography facilities serving vulnerable women have longer follow-up times

Objective

To investigate mammography facilities’ follow‐up times, population vulnerability, system‐based processes, and association with cancer stage at diagnosis.

Data Sources

Prospectively collected from San Francisco Mammography Registry (SFMR) 2005‐2011, California Cancer Registry 2005‐2012, SFMR facility survey 2012.

Study Design

We examined time to biopsy for 17 750 abnormal mammogram results (BI‐RADS 4/5), categorizing eight facilities as short or long follow‐up based on proportion of mammograms with biopsy at 30 days. We examined facility population vulnerability (race/ethnicity, language, education), and system processes. Among women with a cancer diagnosis, we modeled odds of advanced‐stage (≥IIb) cancer diagnosis by facility follow‐up group.

Data Extraction Methods

Merged SFMR, Cancer Registry and facility survey data.

Principal Findings

Facilities (N = 4) with short follow‐up completed biopsies by 30 days for 82% of mammograms compared with 62% for facilities with long follow‐up (N = 4) (P < 0.0001). All facilities serving high proportions of vulnerable women were long follow‐up facilities. The long follow‐up facilities had fewer radiologists, longer biopsy appointment wait times, and less communication directly with women. Having the index abnormal mammogram at a long follow‐up facility was associated with higher adjusted odds of advanced‐stage cancer (OR 1.45; 95% CI 1.10‐1.91).

Conclusions

Providing mammography facilities serving vulnerable women with appropriate resources may decrease disparities in abnormal mammogram follow‐up and cancer diagnosis stage.

Timely follow-up of positive cancer screening results: A systematic review and recommendations from the PROSPR Consortium

Timely follow-up for positive cancer screening results remains suboptimal, and the evidence base to inform decisions on optimizing the timeliness of diagnostic testing is unclear. This systematic review evaluated published studies regarding time to follow-up after a positive screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. The quality of available evidence was very low or low across cancers, with potential attenuated or reversed associations from confounding by indication in most studies. Overall, evidence suggested that the risk for poorer cancer outcomes rises with longer wait times that vary within and across cancer types, which supports performing diagnostic testing as soon as feasible after the positive result, but evidence for specific time targets is limited. Within these limitations, we provide our opinion on cancer-specific recommendations for times to follow-up and how existing guidelines relate to the current evidence. Thresholds set should consider patient worry, potential for loss to follow-up with prolonged wait times, and available resources. Research is needed to better guide the timeliness of diagnostic follow-up, including considerations for patient preferences and existing barriers, while addressing methodological weaknesses. Research is also needed to identify effective interventions for reducing wait times for diagnostic testing, particularly in underserved or low-resource settings. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:199-216. © 2018 American Cancer Society.