Search

Men with prostate cancer face difficult choices when selecting a therapy for localized prostate cancer. Comparative data from controlled studies are lacking and clinical opinions diverge about the benefits and harms of treatment options. Consequently, there is limited guidance for patients regarding the impact of treatment decisions on quality of life. There are opportunities for public health to intervene at several decision-making points. Information on typical quality of life outcomes associated with specific prostate cancer treatments could help patients select treatment options. From 2003 to present, the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control at CDC has supported projects to explore patient information-seeking behavior post-diagnosis, caregiver and provider involvement in treatment decision making, and patient quality of life following prostate cancer treatment. CDC's work also includes research that explores barriers and facilitators to the presentation of active surveillance as a viable treatment option and promotes equal access to information for men and their caregivers. This article provides an overview of the literature and considerations that initiated establishing a prospective public health research agenda around treatment decision making. Insights gathered from CDC-supported studies are poised to enhance understanding of the process of shared decision making and the influence of patient, caregiver, and provider preferences on the selection of treatment choices. These findings provide guidance about attributes that maximize patient experiences in survivorship, including optimal quality of life and patient and caregiver satisfaction with information, treatment decisions, and subsequent care., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: For many men, the net benefit of prostate cancer screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests may be small. Many major medical organizations have issued recommendations for prostate cancer screening, stressing the need for shared decision making before ordering a test. The purpose of this study is to better understand associations between discussions about benefits and harms of PSA testing and uptake of the test among men aged ≥40 years., Methods: Associations between pre-screening discussions and PSA testing were examined using self-reported data from the 2012 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Unadjusted prevalence of PSA testing was estimated and AORs were calculated using logistic regression in 2014., Results: The multivariate analysis showed that men who had ever discussed advantages of PSA testing only or discussed both advantages and disadvantages were more likely, respectively, to report having had a test within the past year than men who had no discussions (p<0.001). In addition, men who had only discussed the disadvantages of PSA testing with their healthcare providers were more likely (AOR=2.75, 95% CI=2.00, 3.79) to report getting tested than men who had no discussions., Conclusions: Discussions of the benefits or harms of PSA testing are positively associated with increased uptake of the test. Given the conflicting recommendations for prostate cancer screening and increasing importance of shared decision making, this study points to the need for understanding how pre-screening discussions are being conducted in clinical practice and the role played by patients' values and preferences in decisions about PSA testing., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The benefits of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) on cervical cancer screening for participating uninsured low-income women have never been measured., Purpose: To estimate the benefits in life-years (LYs) gained; quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained; and deaths averted., Methods: A cervical cancer simulation model was constructed based on an existing cohort model. The model was applied to NBCCEDP participants aged 18-64 years. Screening habits for uninsured low-income women were estimated using National Health Interview Survey data from 1990 to 2005 and NBCCEDP data from 1991 to 2007. The study was conducted during 2011-2012 and covered all 68 NBCCEDP grantees in 50 states, the District of Columbia, five U.S. territories, and 12 tribal organizations. Separate simulations were performed for the following three scenarios: (1) women who received NBCCEDP (Program) screening; (2) women who received screening without the program (No Program); and (3) women who received no screening (No Screening)., Results: Among 1.8 million women screened in 1991-2007, the Program added 10,369 LYs gained compared to No Program, and 101,509 LYs gained compared to No Screening. The Program prevented 325 women from dying of cervical cancer relative to No Program, and 3,829 relative to No Screening. During this time period, the Program accounted for 15,589 QALYs gained when compared with No Program, and 121,529 QALYs gained when compared with No Screening., Conclusions: These estimates suggest that NBCCEDP cervical cancer screening has reduced mortality among medically underserved low-income women who participated in the program., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Breast cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women aged <50 years. Studies on the effects of breast cancer mortality among young women are limited., Purpose: To assess trends in breast cancer mortality rates among women aged 20-49 years, estimate years of potential life lost (YPLL), and the value of productivity losses due to premature mortality., Methods: Age-adjusted rates and rate ratios (RRs) were calculated using 1970-2008 U.S. mortality data. Breast cancer mortality rates over time were assessed using Joinpoint regression modeling. YPLL was calculated using number of cancer deaths and the remaining life expectancy at the age of death. Value of productivity losses was estimated using the number of deaths and the present value of future lifetime earnings., Results: From 1970 to 2008, the age-adjusted breast cancer mortality rate among young women was 12.02/100,000. Rates were higher in the Northeast (RR=1.03, 95% CI, 1.02-1.04). The annual decline in breast cancer mortality rates among blacks was smaller (-0.68%) compared with whites (-2.02%). The total number of deaths associated with breast cancer was 225,866, which accounted for an estimated 7.98 million YPLL. The estimated total productivity loss in 2008 was $5.49 billion and individual lifetime lost earnings were $1.10 million., Conclusions: Considering the effect of breast cancer on women of working age and the disproportionate impact on black women, more age-appropriate interventions with multiple strategies are needed to help reduce these substantial health and economic burdens, improve survival, and in turn reduce productivity costs associated with premature death., (Published by American Journal of Preventive Medicine on behalf of American Journal of Preventive Medicine.)

Background: The National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) provides breast cancer screening to medically underserved, low-income women aged 40-64 years. No study has evaluated NBCCEDP's effect on breast cancer mortality., Purpose: This study estimates life-years saved by NBCCEDP breast cancer screening compared with screening in the absence of NBCCEDP and with no screening., Methods: A breast cancer simulation model based on existing Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network models was constructed. The screening module from these models was modified to reflect screening frequency for NBCCEDP participants. Screening data for uninsured women represented what would have happened without the program. Separate simulations were performed for women who received NBCCEDP (Program) screening, women who potentially received screening without the program (No Program), and women who received no screening (No Screening). The impact of NBCCEDP was estimated as the difference in life-years between the Program and No Program, and the Program and No Screening scenarios. The analysis was performed in 2008-2009., Results: Among 1.8 million women who were screened between 1991 and 2006, the Program saved 100,800 life-years compared with No Program and 369,000 life-years compared with No Screening. Per woman screened, the Program saved 0.056 life-years (95% CI=0.031, 0.081) compared with No Program and 0.206 life-years (95% CI=0.177, 0.234) compared with No Screening. Per woman with invasive breast cancer and screen-detected invasive cancer, the Program saved 0.41 and 0.71 life-years, respectively, compared with No Program., Conclusions: These estimates suggest that NBCCEDP breast cancer screening has reduced mortality among medically uninsured and underinsured low-income women., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)