Prevalence of family history of breast, colorectal, prostate, and lung cancer in a population-based study

Family and personal history of cancer in the All of Us research program for precision medicine

The All of Us (AoU) Research Program is making available one of the largest and most diverse collections of health data in the US to researchers. Using the All of Us database, we evaluated family and personal histories of five common types of cancer in 89,453 individuals, comparing these data to 24,305 participants from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). Comparing datasets, we found similar family cancer history (33%) rates, but higher personal cancer history in the AoU dataset (9.2% in AoU vs. 5.11% in NHIS), Methodological (e.g. survey-versus telephone-based data collection) and demographic variability may explain these between-data differences, but more research is needed.

Breast cancer knowledge & information seeking among African American women below screening age

OBJECTIVES

African American women below screening age disproportionately face greater mortality from breast cancer relative to peers of other races and African American women of screening age. The current study examines breast cancer knowledge and health information seeking of African American women below screening age.

METHODS

We collected survey data from 99 African American women below screening age on their breast cancer knowledge and health information seeking behaviors. As secondary analysis, we harmonized data from a previous study to compare breast cancer knowledge between African American women below and of (N = 209) screening age.

RESULTS

The average woman below screening age correctly answered 2.84 (SD=1.08) of six breast cancer knowledge items, 2.67 (SD=1.01) of five mammogram items, 1.44 (SD=0.86) of three treatment items, and had lower knowledge (p < .001) in each area relative to screening age women. Women below screening age sought information primarily from medical providers and the internet.

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy for eliminating early-onset breast cancer disparities impacting African American women is addressing the limited breast cancer knowledge in this age group. Practice Implications In addition to age-appropriate information for this group, guidance for medical providers would be beneficial, as providers are this group's most common source of health information.

Identification of women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer in a sample of 1000 Slovenian women: a comparison of guidelines

Background

An important number of breast and ovarian cancer cases is due to a strong genetic predisposition. The main tool for identifying individuals at risk is recognizing a suggestive family history of cancer. We present a prospective study on applying three selected clinical guidelines to a cohort of 1000 Slovenian women to determine the prevalence of at-risk women according to each of the guidelines and analyze the differences amongst the guidelines.

Methods

Personal and family history of cancer was collected for 1000 Slovenian women. Guidelines by three organizations: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), American College of Medical Genetics in cooperation with National Society of Genetic Counselors (ACMG/NSGC), and Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) were applied to the cohort. The number of women identified, the characteristics of the high-risk population, and the agreement between the guidelines were explored.

Results

NCCN guidelines identify 13.2% of women, ACMG/NSGC guidelines identify 7.1% of women, and SGO guidelines identify 7.0% of women from the Slovenian population, while 6.2% of women are identified by all three guidelines as having high-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer.

Conclusions

We identified 13.7% of women from the Slovenian population as being at an increased risk for breast and ovarian cancer based on their personal and family history of cancer using all of the guidelines. There are important differences between the guidelines. NCCN guidelines are the most inclusive, identifying nearly twice the amount of women as high-risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer as compared to the AGMG/NSCG and SGO guidelines in the Slovenian population.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08400-8.

Opportunities, Pitfalls, and Alternatives in Adapting Electronic Health Records for Health Services Research

Electronic health records (EHRs) offer the potential to study large numbers of patients but are designed for clinical practice, not research. Despite the increasing availability of EHR data, their use in research comes with its own set of challenges. In this article, we describe some important considerations and potential solutions for commonly encountered problems when working with large-scale, EHR-derived data for health services and community-relevant health research. Specifically, using EHR data requires the researcher to define the relevant patient subpopulation, reliably identify the primary care provider, recognize the EHR as containing episodic (i.e., unstructured longitudinal) data, account for changes in health system composition and treatment options over time, understand that the EHR is not always well-organized and accurate, design methods to identify the same patient across multiple health systems, account for the enormous size of the EHR, and consider barriers to data access. Associations found in the EHR may be nonrepresentative of associations in the general population, but a clear understanding of the EHR-based associations can be enormously valuable to the process of improving outcomes for patients in learning health care systems. In the context of building 2 large-scale EHR-derived data sets for health services research, we describe the potential pitfalls of EHR data and propose some solutions for those planning to use EHR data in their research. As ever greater amounts of clinical data are amassed in the EHR, use of these data for research will become increasingly common and important. Attention to the intricacies of EHR data will allow for more informed analysis and interpretation of results from EHR-based data sets.

Prevalence of a First-Degree Relative With Colorectal Cancer and Uptake of Screening Among Persons 40 to 54 Years Old

BACKGROUND & AIMS

People with a first-degree relative with colorectal cancer (CRC) are recommended to start CRC screening at age 40. However, there is limited information on how many people in different age groups have a known family history of CRC and how many of them have had a colonoscopy.

METHODS

We set up a multicenter, cross-sectional, population-based study in Germany to determine what proportions of persons in age groups from 40 to 54 years old have a known family history of CRC. We invited 160,000 persons to participate in an online survey from 2015 through 2016. We investigated what proportions of persons in each age group reported a family history of CRC and what proportions of persons underwent a colonoscopy examination using descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Of 28,711 responders to the online questionnaire (8428 were age 40-44 years, 9879 were age 45-49 years, and 10,404 were age 50-54 years), 2705 stated that they had a first-degree relative with CRC (9.4%). The prevalence of a first-degree relative with CRC increased with age: 7.5%, 9.6%, and 10.9% for people 40 to 44 years old, 45 to 49 years old, and 50 to 54 years old, respectively. The prevalence of a first-degree relative who received a diagnosis of CRC at age 70 years or older increased steadily with each age group. Although a greater proportion of people with a family history of CRC had undergone a colonoscopy examination (54.5%) than people without a family history of CRC (25.7%; P < .0001), large proportions of people within this risk group were not in compliance with the guidelines (54.8%, 47.6%, and 38.6% for ages 40-44 y, 45-49 y, and 50-54 y, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

One in 10 persons in Germany age 40 to 54 years old has a first-degree relative with CRC. Guidelines recommend initiation of screening at ages 40 to 45 years for people with a family history, yet at this age many people do not have a family history of CRC yet, and almost half of persons 40 to 54 years old with a family history of CRC have not yet received a screening colonoscopy.

Gender differences in self-reported family history of cancer: A review and secondary data analysis

Background

Assessment of family history of cancer (FHC) mostly relies on self‐report. Our goal was to find out whether there is a systematic gender difference in self‐reported FHC.

Methods

We identified nine population‐based studies which provided statistics of FHC in men and women (N₁ = 404 541). Furthermore, we analyzed data (N₂ = 167 154) from several iterations of the US‐based Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). We calculated the proportion of positive FHC, odds ratios (OR M/F), 95% confidence intervals, and aggregated statistics. We additionally analyzed in‐depth questions about FHC from HINTS 5 Cycle 2.

Results

In the reviewed studies the odds of men reporting a FHC were lower compared with the odds of women with an average OR of 0.84 [0.71; 1.00] across all studies and an OR of 0.75 [0.70; 0.80] for the six studies from the US and Europe. The gender gap was replicated in our own analyses of HINTS and NHIS with an average OR of 0.75 [0.71; 0.79]. In HINTS 5 Cycle 2 men described themselves as less familiar with their FHC and less confident answering questions regarding FHC. They were also less likely to discuss FHC with family members.

Conclusions

Men— at least in the US and Europe—were consistently less likely to report FHC compared with women. Future research should investigate how the assessment of FHC can be improved to reduce these differences. Health care professionals should also consider the potential for biased reporting by gender when assessing FHC.

Race/Ethnicity and Accuracy of Self-Reported Female First-Degree Family History of Breast and Other Cancers in the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated accuracy of self-reported family history of breast and other cancers in racial/ethnic minorities.

METHODS

We assessed the accuracy of cancer family history reports by women with breast cancer (probands) from the Northern California Breast Cancer Family Registry compared with 2 reference standards: personal cancer history reports by female first-degree relatives and California Cancer Registry records.

RESULTS

Probands reported breast cancer in first-degree relatives with high accuracy, but accuracy was lower for other cancers. Sensitivity (percentage correctly identifying relatives with cancer) was 93% [95% confidence interval (CI), 89.5-95.4] when compared with the relatives' self-report of breast cancer as the reference standard and varied little by proband race/ethnicity and other demographic factors, except for marginally lower sensitivity for Hispanic white probands (87.3%; 95% CI, 78.0-93.1; P = 0.07) than non-Hispanic white probands (95.1%; 95% CI, 88.9-98.0). Accuracy was also high when compared with cancer registry records as the reference standard, with a sensitivity of 95.5% (95% CI, 93.4-96.9) for breast cancer, but lower sensitivity for Hispanic white probands (91.2%; 95% CI, 84.4-95.2; P = 0.05) and probands with low English language proficiency (80%; 95% CI, 52.8-93.5; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-Hispanic white, African American, and Asian American probands reported first-degree breast cancer family history with high accuracy, although sensitivity was lower for Hispanic white probands and those with low English language proficiency.

IMPACT

Self-reported family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives is highly accurate and can be used as a reliable standard when other validation methods are not available.

Defining low-value PSA testing in a large retrospective cohort: Finding common ground between discordant guidelines

BACKGROUND

Reports of low-value prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing (testing in which the harms outweigh the benefits) generally employ population level data sources. While such results may be generalizable, they often lack the detail necessary to understand provider clinical decision making and guideline concordance. Using a retrospective study of PSA testing at our institution we intend to characterize the frequency and patterns associated with low-value PSA testing.

METHODS

We leveraged the electronic health record to determine guideline-defined low-value testing in our health system from 07/01/2012 to 06/30/2017. Secondarily, we measured the between-testing interval for repeat tests and the rates of prostate cancer risk factors and comorbidities among men receiving screening.

RESULTS

Overall, 21,145 PSA tests were performed on 12,303 men. The rate of low-value testing ranged from 23.4 to 56.8%, depending upon the specific guideline. For repeat tests, the median between-testing interval was 12.6 months. Risk factors for prostate cancer were uncommon, but more frequent in men age <55 years compared to men age 55-69 years (17.6% vs. 13.5%, p < 0.001). Screened older men (age >70 years) were more likely to have a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3, compared to the 55-69 reference group (31.4% vs. 17.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Low-value prostate cancer testing is prevalent. Between-testing intervals were often times shorter than recommended. Screening among younger men was frequent despite low rates of risk factors. High rates of comorbidity may limit life expectancy among older men receiving screening. These findings highlight the need for improved guidance with prostate cancer screening.

Utilization of colonoscopy and colonoscopic findings among individuals aged 40-54 years with a positive family history of colorectal cancer: a cross-sectional study in general practice

Guidelines recommend early colonoscopy for individuals with a positive family history of colorectal cancer (CRC), but little is known about the utilization of colonoscopy and the frequency of colorectal neoplasms among younger affected individuals in Germany. The aim of this study was to determine the utilization of colonoscopy and the frequency of colorectal neoplasms in this risk group. We conducted a cross-sectional study in a general practice setting. Patients aged 40-54 years with at least one first-degree relative with CRC were identified, counseled on their increased risk, and referred to colonoscopy if they decided to undergo this procedure. We assessed the reported utilization of colonoscopy before study participation with a questionnaire and obtained results of colonoscopies performed during the study period from colonoscopy reports. Out of 484 patients with a positive family history of CRC, 191 (39.5%) fulfilled the inclusion criteria and participated in the study: 54% reported that at least one colonoscopy had been performed before study participation. Out of 191 participants, 86 (45%) underwent a colonoscopy during study period. No CRC was found, but 16.3% had any adenoma, and 7.0% had advanced adenomas. Overall, 155 (82%) study participants underwent a colonoscopy either before or during the study period. The utilization of colonoscopies among participants was remarkably high even before study participation. This rate increased up to 82% after counseling by general practitioners. A relevant number of participants had (advanced) adenomas. It appears worthwhile to involve general practitioners in identifying and counseling younger individuals with familial risk for CRC.

Frequency of a positive family history of colorectal cancer in general practice: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Evidence on the frequency of a positive family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) among individuals aged <55 years is lacking. General practice setting might be well suited for the identification of individuals in this above-average risk group.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of a reported positive family history of CRC among patients aged 40 to 54 years in a general practice setting.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study in 21 general practices in Germany. Patients aged 40 to 54 years were identified by means of the practice software and interviewed by health care assistants using a standardized four-item questionnaire. Outcome was occurrence of a positive family history of CRC, defined as at least one first-degree relative (FDR: parents, siblings, or children) with CRC. Further measurements were FDRs with CRC / colorectal polyps (adenomas) diagnosed before the age of 50 and occurrence of three or more relatives with colorectal, stomach, cervical, ovarian, urethel or renal pelvic cancer.

RESULTS

Out of 6723 participants, 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.6% to 7.8%) reported at least one FDR with CRC and 1.2% (95% CI 0.9% to 1.5%) reported FDRs with CRC diagnosed before the age of 50. A further 2.6% (95% CI 2.3% to 3.0%) reported colorectal polyps in FDRs diagnosed before the age of 50 and 2.1% (95% CI 1.8% to 2.5%) reported three or more relatives with entities mentioned above.

CONCLUSION

One in 14 patients reported at least one FDR with CRC. General practice should be considered when defining requirements of risk-adapted CRC screening.

Understanding the contribution of family history to colorectal cancer risk and its clinical implications: A state-of-the-science review

Persons with a family history (FH) of colorectal cancer (CRC) or adenomas that are not due to known hereditary syndromes have an increased risk for CRC. An understanding of these risks, screening recommendations, and screening behaviors can inform strategies for reducing the CRC burden in these families. A comprehensive review of the literature published within the past 10 years has been performed to assess what is known about cancer risk, screening guidelines, adherence and barriers to screening, and effective interventions in persons with an FH of CRC and to identify FH tools used to identify these individuals and inform care. Existing data show that having 1 affected first-degree relative (FDR) increases the CRC risk 2-fold, and the risk increases with multiple affected FDRs and a younger age at diagnosis. There is variability in screening recommendations across consensus guidelines. Screening adherence is <50% and is lower in persons under the age of 50 years. A provider's recommendation, multiple affected relatives, and family encouragement facilitate screening; insufficient collection of FH, low knowledge of guidelines, and poor family communication are important barriers. Effective interventions incorporate strategies for overcoming barriers, but these have not been broadly tested in clinical settings. Four strategies for reducing CRC in persons with familial risk are suggested: 1) improving the collection and utilization of the FH of cancer, 2) establishing a consensus for screening guidelines by FH, 3) enhancing provider-patient knowledge of guidelines and communication about CRC risk, and 4) encouraging survivors to promote screening within their families and partnering with existing screening programs to expand their reach to high-risk groups. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2633-2645. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Ages at menarche- and menopause-related genetic variants in relation to terminal duct lobular unit involution in normal breast tissue

Reduced levels of terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) involution, as reflected by higher numbers of TDLUs and acini per TDLU, have been associated with higher breast cancer risk. Younger age at menarche and older age at menopause have been previously related to lower levels of TDLU involution. To determine a possible genetic link, we examined whether single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously established in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) for ages at menarche and menopause are associated with TDLU involution. We conducted a pooled analysis of 862 women from two studies. H&E tissue sections were assessed for numbers of TDLUs and acini/TDLU. Poisson regression models were used to estimate associations of 36 menarche- and 21 menopause-SNPs with TDLU counts, acini counts/TDLU, and the product of these two measures, adjusting for age and study site. Fourteen percent of evaluated SNPs (eight SNPs) were associated with TDLU counts at p < 0.05, suggesting an enrichment of associations with TDLU counts. However, only menopause-SNPs had >50 % that were either significantly or nonsignificantly associated with TDLU measures in the directions consistent with their relationships shown in GWAS. Among ten SNPs that were statistically significantly associated with at least one TDLU involution measure (p < 0.05), seven SNPs (rs466639: RXRG; rs2243803: SLC14A2; rs2292573: GAB2; rs6438424: 3q13.32; rs7606918: METAP1D; rs11668344: TMEM150B; rs1635501: EXO1) were associated in the consistent directions. Our data suggest that the loci associated with ages at menarche and menopause may influence TDLU involution, suggesting some shared genetic mechanisms. However, larger studies are needed to confirm the results.

Cost-analysis model of colonoscopy preparation using split-dose reduced-volume oral sulfate solution (OSS) and polyethylene glycol with electrolytes solution (PEG-ELS)

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to (1) develop a cost model for colonoscopy preparation among patients referred for colonoscopy using split-dose reduced-volume oral sulfate solution (OSS) and generic polyethylene glycol with electrolytes solution (PEG-ELS), (2) examine cost savings associated with OSS vs PEG-ELS, and (3) assess the robustness of the cost model.

METHODS

Efficacy of each agent was based on the results of a 541-patient clinical trial comparing OSS to PEG-ELS. Cleansing agent and colonoscopy procedure costs were calculated from OptumHealth Reporting & Insights claims data for 2010-Q12013. In the model, patients' colonoscopies were tracked over a 25 or 35 year time period until the patients reached age 75. The difference per patient per year (PPPY) in total cleansing agent and colonoscopy procedure costs over the time horizon between the OSS and PEG-ELS cohort was calculated. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the cost model.

RESULTS

The model showed lower cost for OSS patients over the time horizon. Total PPPY costs were $280.34 for the OSS cohort and $296.36 for the PEG-ELS cohort, resulting in a cost saving of $16.01 PPPY for the OSS cohort. This was due primarily to OSS patients having fewer colonoscopies (OSS: 0.158 vs PEG-ELS: 0.170 PPPY). Over the time horizon, cost savings of $4 763 335 were observed among 10, 000 OSS patients. Cost savings switched from OSS to PEG-ELS cohort in four cases: (1) base-case cost of a completed colonoscopy decreased by 75%, (2) base-case cost of OSS increased to over $143 per usage, (3) all non-completers were lost to follow-up, and (4) OSS bowel preparation quality dropped below PEG-ELS to 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

From a payer's perspective, the model showed that the use of OSS as the cleansing agent resulted in potential cost savings compared with PEG-ELS. Cost savings under OSS remained under various sensitivity analyses.

Family History of Cancer in Relation to Breast Cancer Subtypes in African American Women

BACKGROUND

The evidence on the relation of family history of cancers other than breast cancer to breast cancer risk is conflicting, and most studies have not assessed specific breast cancer subtypes.

METHODS

We assessed the relation of first-degree family history of breast, prostate, lung, colorectal, ovarian, and cervical cancer and lymphoma or leukemia, to the risk of estrogen receptor-positive (ER(+)), ER(-), and triple-negative breast cancer in data from the African American Breast Cancer Epidemiology and Risk Consortium. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate ORs and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

There were 3,023 ER(+) and 1,497 ER(-) breast cancer cases (including 696 triple-negative cases) and 17,420 controls. First-degree family history of breast cancer was associated with increased risk of each subtype: OR = 1.76 (95% CI, 1.57-1.97) for ER(+), 1.67 (1.42-1.95) for ER(-), and 1.72 (1.38-2.13) for triple-negative breast cancer. Family history of cervical cancer was associated with increased risk of ER(-) (OR = 2.39; 95% CI, 1.36-4.20), but not ER(+) cancer. Family history of both breast and prostate cancer was associated with increased risk of ER(+) (3.40; 2.42-4.79) and ER(-) (2.09; 1.21-3.63) cancer, but family history of both breast and lung cancer was associated only with ER(-) cancer (2.11; 1.29-3.46).

CONCLUSIONS

A family history of cancers other than breast may influence the risk of breast cancer, and associations may differ by subtype.

IMPACT

Greater surveillance and counseling for additional screening may be warranted for women with a family history of cancer.

A positive family history as a risk factor for prostate cancer in a population-based study with organised prostate-specific antigen screening: results of the Swiss European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC, Aarau)

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of a positive family history (FH) as a risk factor for prostate cancer incidence and grade among men undergoing organised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening in a population-based study.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The study cohort comprised all attendees of the Swiss arm of the European Randomised Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC) with systematic PSA level tests every 4 years. Men reporting first-degree relative(s) diagnosed with prostate cancer were considered to have a positive FH. Biopsy was exclusively PSA triggered at a PSA level threshold of 3 ng/mL. The primary endpoint was prostate cancer diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

Of 4 932 attendees with a median (interquartile range, IQR) age of 60.9 (57.6-65.1) years, 334 (6.8%) reported a positive FH. The median (IQR) follow-up duration was 11.6 (10.3-13.3) years. Cumulative prostate cancer incidence was 60/334 (18%, positive FH) and 550/4 598 (12%, negative FH) [odds ratio 1.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-2.2, P = 0.001). In both groups, most prostate cancer diagnosed was low grade. There were no significant differences in PSA level at diagnosis, biopsy Gleason score or Gleason score on pathological specimen among men who underwent radical prostatectomy between both groups. On multivariable analysis, age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.06), baseline PSA level (HR 1.13, 95% CI 1.12-1.14), and FH (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.24-2.14) were independent predictors for overall prostate cancer incidence (all P < 0.001). Only baseline PSA level (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12-1.16, P < 0.001) was an independent predictor of Gleason score ≥7 prostate cancer on prostate biopsy. The proportion of interval prostate cancer diagnosed in-between the screening rounds was not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

Irrespective of the FH status, the current PSA-based screening setting detects the majority of aggressive prostate cancers and missed only a minority of interval cancers with a 4-year screening algorithm. Our results suggest that men with a positive FH are at increased risk of low-grade but not aggressive prostate cancer.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in Switzerland: Cross-Sectional Trends (2007-2012) in Socioeconomic Disparities

BACKGROUND

Despite universal health care coverage, disparities in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening by income in Switzerland have been reported. However, it is not known if these disparities have changed over time. This study examines the association between socioeconomic position and CRC screening in Switzerland between 2007 and 2012.

METHODS

Data from the 2007 (n = 5,946) and 2012 (n = 7,224) population-based Swiss Health Interview Survey data (SHIS) were used to evaluate the association between monthly household income, education, and employment with CRC screening, defined as endoscopy in the past 10 years or fecal occult blood test (FOBT) in the past 2 years. Multivariable Poisson regression was used to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) adjusting for demographics, health status, and health utilization.

RESULTS

CRC screening increased from 18.9% in 2007 to 22.2% in 2012 (padjusted: = 0.036). During the corresponding time period, endoscopy increased (8.2% vs. 15.0%, padjusted:<0.001) and FOBT decreased (13.0% vs. 9.8%, padjusted:0.002). CRC screening prevalence was greater in the highest income (>$6,000) vs. lowest income (≤$2,000) group in 2007 (24.5% vs. 10.5%, PR:1.37, 95%CI: 0.96-1.96) and in 2012 (28.6% vs. 16.0%, PR:1.45, 95%CI: 1.09-1.92); this disparity did not significantly change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

While CRC screening prevalence in Switzerland increased from 2007 to 2012, CRC screening coverage remains low and disparities in CRC screening by income persisted over time. These findings highlight the need for increased access to CRC screening as well as enhanced awareness of the benefits of CRC screening in the Swiss population, particularly among low-income residents.

Breast cancer incidence in a cohort of U.S. flight attendants

BACKGROUND

Flight attendants may have elevated breast cancer incidence (BCI). We evaluated BCI's association with cosmic radiation dose and circadian rhythm disruption among 6,093 female former U.S. flight attendants.

METHODS

We collected questionnaire data on BCI and risk factors for breast cancer from 2002-2005. We conducted analyses to evaluate (i) BCI in the cohort compared to the U.S. population; and (ii) exposure-response relations. We applied an indirect adjustment to estimate whether parity and age at first birth (AFB) differences between the cohort and U.S. population could explain BCI that differed from expectation.

RESULTS

BCI was elevated but may be explained by lower parity and older AFB in the cohort than among U.S. women. BCI was not associated with exposure metrics in the cohort overall. Significant positive associations with both were observed only among women with parity of three or more.

CONCLUSIONS

Future cohort analyses may be informative on the role of these occupational exposures and non-occupational risk factors.

Relative value of race, family history and prostate specific antigen as indications for early initiation of prostate cancer screening

PURPOSE

Many guidelines suggest earlier screening for prostate cancer in men at high risk, with risk defined in terms of race and family history. Recent evidence suggests that baseline prostate specific antigen is strongly predictive of the long-term risk of aggressive prostate cancer. We compared the usefulness of risk stratifying early screening by race, family history and prostate specific antigen at age 45 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using estimates from the literature we calculated the proportion of men targeted for early screening using family history, black race or prostate specific antigen as the criterion for high risk. We calculated the proportion of prostate cancer deaths that would occur in those men by age 75 years.

RESULTS

Screening based on family history involved 10% of men, accounting for 14% of prostate cancer deaths. Using black race as a risk criterion involved 13% of men, accounting for 28% of deaths. In contrast, 44% of prostate cancer deaths occurred in the 10% of men with the highest prostate specific antigen at age 45 years. In no sensitivity analysis for race and family history did the ratio of risk group size to number of prostate cancer deaths in that risk group approach that of prostate specific antigen.

CONCLUSIONS

Basing decisions for early screening on prostate specific antigen at age 45 years provided the best ratio between men screened and potential cancer deaths avoided. Given the lack of evidence that race or family history affects the relationship between prostate specific antigen and risk, prostate specific antigen based risk stratification would likely include any black men or men with a family history who are destined to experience aggressive disease. Differential screening based on risk should be informed by baseline prostate specific antigen.

Projecting the performance of risk prediction based on polygenic analyses of genome-wide association studies

We report a new model to project the predictive performance of polygenic models based on the number and distribution of effect sizes for the underlying susceptibility alleles and the size of the training dataset. Using estimates of effect-size distribution and heritability derived from current studies, we project that while 45% of the variance of height has been attributed to common tagging Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP), a model trained on one million people may only explain 33.4% of variance of the trait. Current studies can identify 3.0%, 1.1%, and 7.0%, of the populations who are at two-fold or higher than average risk for Type 2 diabetes, coronary artery disease and prostate cancer, respectively. Tripling of sample sizes could elevate the percentages to 18.8%, 6.1%, and 12.2%, respectively. The utility of future polygenic models will depend on achievable sample sizes, underlying genetic architecture and information on other risk-factors, including family history.

Bias in the reporting of family history: implications for clinical care

Family history of cancer is critical for identifying and managing patients at risk for cancer. However, the quality of family history data is dependent on the accuracy of patient self reporting. Therefore, the validity of family history reporting is crucial to the quality of clinical care. A retrospective review of family history data collected at a community hospital between 2005 and 2009 was performed in 43,257 women presenting for screening mammography. Reported numbers of breast, colon, prostate, lung, and ovarian cancer were compared in maternal relatives vs. paternal relatives and in first vs. second degree relatives. Significant reporting differences were found between maternal and paternal family history of cancer, in addition to degree of relative. The number of paternal family histories of cancer was significantly lower than that of maternal family histories of cancer. Similarly, the percentage of grandparents' family histories of cancer was significantly lower than the percentage of parents' family histories of cancer. This trend was found in all cancers except prostate cancer. Self-reported family history in the community setting is often influenced by both bloodline of the cancer history and the degree of relative affected. This is evident by the underreporting of paternal family histories of cancer, and also, though to a lesser extent, by degree. These discrepancies in reporting family history of cancer imply we need to take more care in collecting accurate family histories and also in the clinical management of individuals in relation to hereditary risk.

History of upper gastrointestinal cancers in relatives: a community-based estimate

AIM

The present study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of positive family history of these cancers in a large population-based sample of Tehran province, capital of Iran.

BACKGROUND

Upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancers (gastric and esophagus cancer) constitute a major health problem worldwide. A family history of cancer can increase the risk for developing cancer and recognized as one of the most important risk factors in predicting personal cancer risk.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study designed as a cross-sectional survey in general population (2006-2007) of Tehran province. Totally 7,300 persons (age > = 20 years) sampled by random sampling on the basis of the list of postal, of whom 6,700 persons agreed to participate (response rate 92%). Respondents were asked if any first-degree (FDR) or second-degree (SDR) relatives had gastric or esophageal cancer.

RESULTS

Totally, 6,453 respondents (48% male) entered to the study. The mean age of responders with positive FH was significantly higher than those with negative FH (P < 0.05). In total, 341 respondents (5.3%) reporting a history of UGI cancers in their relatives, 134(2.1%) in FDRs, and 207(3.2%) in SDRs.

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed that the reported prevalence of FH of UGI cancers was relatively low and varied by specific respondent characteristics such as age and sex. However, the estimates of prevalence presented here are likely to be conservative compared with actual prevalence because of self-reported data gathering.