Search

Importance: Health care was disrupted in the US during the first quarter of 2020 with the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Early reports in selected samples suggested that cancer screening services decreased greatly, but population-based estimates of cancer screening prevalence during 2020 have not yet been reported., Objective: To examine changes in breast cancer (BC), cervical cancer (CC), and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening prevalence with contemporary national, population-based Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data., Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study included respondents from the 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020 BRFSS surveys who were eligible for BC (women aged 50-74 years), CC (women aged 25-64 years), and CRC (women and men aged 50-75 years) screening. Data analysis was performed from September 2021 to February 2022., Exposures: Calendar year., Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported receipt of a recent (defined as in the past year) BC, CC, and CRC screening test. Adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) comparing 2020 vs 2018 prevalence and 95% CIs were computed., Results: In total, 479 248 individuals were included in the analyses of BC screening, 301 453 individuals were included in CC screening, and 854 210 individuals were included in CRC screening, In 2020, among respondents aged 50 to 75 years, 14 815 (11.4%) were Black, 12 081 (12.6%) were Hispanic, 156 198 (67.3%) were White, and 79 234 (29.9%) graduated from college (all percentages are weighted). After 4 years (2014-2018) of nearly steady prevalence, past-year BC screening decreased by 6% between 2018 and 2020 (from 61.6% in 2018 to 57.8% in 2020; aPR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96), and CC screening decreased by 11% (from 58.3% in 2018 to 51.9% in 2020; aPR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.87-0.91). The magnitude of these decreases was greater in people with lower educational attainment and Hispanic persons. CRC screening prevalence remained steady; past-year stool testing increased by 7% (aPR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12), offsetting a 16% decrease in colonoscopy (aPR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.82-0.88) between 2018 and 2020., Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study, stool testing increased and counterbalanced a decrease in colonoscopy during 2020, and BC and CC screening modestly decreased. How these findings might be associated with outcomes is not yet known, but they will be important to monitor, especially in populations with lower socioeconomic status, who experienced greater screening decreases during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: Breast cancer screening utilization steeply dropped at the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. However, the effects on breast cancer screening in lower income populations are unknown. This study examined changes in breast cancer screening rates (BCSRs) during the pandemic among 32 community health centers (CHCs) that provided health care to lower income populations., Methods: Secondary data from 32 CHCs participating in an American Cancer Society grant program to increase breast cancer screening services were used. BCSRs were defined as the percentage of women aged 50 to 74 years who had a medical visit in the past 12 months (142,207 in 2018, 142,003 in 2019, and 150,630 in 2020) and received a screening mammogram within the last 27 months. BCSRs in July 2020, July 2019, and June 2018 were compared with screening rate ratios (SRRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: BCSRs significantly rose by 18% between 2018 and 2019 (from 45.8% to 53.9%; SRR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.17-1.18) and then declined by 8% between 2019 and 2020 (from 53.9% to 49.6%; SRR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.92-0.93). If the 2018-2019 BCSR trends had continued through 2020, 63.3% of women would have been screened in 2020 in contrast to the 49.6% who were; this potentially translated into 47,517 fewer mammograms and 242 missed breast cancer diagnoses in this population., Conclusions: In this study of 32 CHCs, BCSRs declined by 8% from July 2019 to 2020, and this reversed an 18% improvement between July 2018 and 2019. Declining BCSRs among CHCs during the COVID-19 pandemic call for policies to support and resources to identify women in need of screening., (© 2021 American Cancer Society.)

Introduction: Medicaid expansions following the Affordable Care Act have improved insurance coverage in low-income adults, but little is known about its impact on cancer screening. This study examined associations between Medicaid expansion timing and colorectal cancer (CRC) and breast cancer (BC) screening., Methods: Up-to-date and past 2-year CRC (n=95,400) and BC (women, n=43,279) screening prevalence were computed among low-income respondents aged 50-64 years in 2012, 2014, and 2016 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data. Respondents were grouped according to Medicaid expansion timing as: very early ([VE] six states expanding March 1, 2010-April 14, 2011), early (21 states expanding January 1, 2014-August 15, 2014), late (five states expanding January 1, 2015-July 1, 2016), and non-expansion states (19 states). Absolute adjusted difference-in-differences (aDDs) were computed in 2018-2019 (ref, non-expansion states)., Results: Between 2012 and 2016, absolute up-to-date CRC screening increased by 8.8%, 2.9%, 2.4%, and 3.8% among low-income adults in VE, early, late, and non-expansion states, respectively. Past 2-year CRC screening increased by 8.0% in VE and 2.8% in non-expansion states, with an aDD of 4.9% (p=0.041). In 2012-2016, up-to-date BC screening increased by 5.1%, 4.9%, and 3.7% among low-income women in VE, early, and non-expansion states, respectively, but aDDs were not statistically significant., Conclusions: Prevalence of CRC and BC screening among low-income adults rose in Medicaid expansion states, though increases were significantly higher than those in non-expansion states only for recent CRC screening in VE expansion states. Large-scale improvements in cancer screening may take several years following expansion in access to care., (Copyright © 2019 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cancer screening prevalence from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), designed to provide state-level estimates, and the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), designed to provide national estimates, are used to measure progress in cancer control. A detailed description of the extent to which recent cancer screening estimates vary by key demographic characteristics has not been previously described. We examined national prevalence estimates for recommended breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening using data from the 2012 and 2014 BRFSS and the 2010 and 2013 NHIS. Treating the NHIS estimates as the reference, direct differences (DD) were calculated by subtracting NHIS estimates from BRFSS estimates. Relative differences were computed by dividing the DD by the NHIS estimates. Two-sample t-tests (2-tails), were performed to test for statistically significant differences. BRFSS screening estimates were higher than those from NHIS for breast (78.4% versus 72.5%; DD=5.9%, p<0.0001); colorectal (65.5% versus 57.6%; DD=7.9%, p<0.0001); and cervical (83.4% versus 81.8%; DD=1.6%, p<0.0001) cancers. DDs were generally higher in racial/ethnic minorities than whites, in the least educated than most educated persons, and in uninsured than insured persons. For example, the colorectal cancer screening DD for whites was 7.3% compared to ≥8.9% for blacks and Hispanics. Despite higher prevalence estimates in BRFSS compared to NHIS, each survey has a unique and important role in providing information to track cancer screening utilization among various populations. Awareness of these differences and their potential causes is important when comparing the surveys and determining the best application for each data source., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) no longer recommended routine mammography for women aged 40-49 and ≥75 years (younger and older women, respectively). Whether mammography usage and physician recommendation among younger and older women changed in response to these recommendations is unclear., Methods: Cross-sectional data from women aged ≥40 years in the 2008 and 2013 National Health Interview Surveys were used (n=4,942 younger and 3,047 older women) and were analyzed in 2015. Changes between 2008 and 2013 in self-reports about having undergone mammography in the past 2 years and physician recommendation for mammography were expressed as adjusted prevalence difference (PD) and 95% CI., Results: Overall, adjusted prevalence of mammography among younger women was similar in 2008 (62.2%) and 2013 (58.5%) (p=0.05), but significantly declined in high-income (PD=-6.1%, 95% CI=-11.2, -1.0); non-Hispanic white (PD=-5.5%, 95% CI=-10.2, -0.8); and privately insured (PD=-5.7%, 95% CI=-9.8, -1.6) younger women. For older women, there was no change in adjusted mammography prevalence overall (2008, 56.2%; 2013, 54.2%; p=0.473) or by SES. Physician mammography recommendation declined in younger (PD=-5.0%, 95% CI=-8.7, -1.3) and older (PD=-5.8%, 95% CI=-10.5, -1.1) women., Conclusions: Four years after publication of USPSTF mammography recommendations, mammography prevalence for younger and older women did not significantly decrease except for higher-SES younger women. The significant decrease in physician recommendation of mammography in younger and older women may reflect a change in practice patterns by some physicians in response to USPSTF recommendations., (Copyright © 2016 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In this article, the American Cancer Society provides an overview of female breast cancer statistics in the United States, including data on incidence, mortality, survival, and screening. Approximately 231,840 new cases of invasive breast cancer and 40,290 breast cancer deaths are expected to occur among US women in 2015. Breast cancer incidence rates increased among non-Hispanic black (black) and Asian/Pacific Islander women and were stable among non-Hispanic white (white), Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native women from 2008 to 2012. Although white women have historically had higher incidence rates than black women, in 2012, the rates converged. Notably, during 2008 through 2012, incidence rates were significantly higher in black women compared with white women in 7 states, primarily located in the South. From 1989 to 2012, breast cancer death rates decreased by 36%, which translates to 249,000 breast cancer deaths averted in the United States over this period. This decrease in death rates was evident in all racial/ethnic groups except American Indians/Alaska Natives. However, the mortality disparity between black and white women nationwide has continued to widen; and, by 2012, death rates were 42% higher in black women than in white women. During 2003 through 2012, breast cancer death rates declined for white women in all 50 states; but, for black women, declines occurred in 27 of 30 states that had sufficient data to analyze trends. In 3 states (Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin), breast cancer death rates in black women were stable during 2003 through 2012. Widening racial disparities in breast cancer mortality are likely to continue, at least in the short term, in view of the increasing trends in breast cancer incidence rates in black women., (© 2015 American Cancer Society.)

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to examine factors associated with adjuvant radiation treatment (RT) incompletion for women with breast cancer within a large national cancer database., Methods: We identified 394,334 women diagnosed with stage I-III breast cancer during 2004-2012 in the national cancer database who initiated adjuvant external beam adjuvant RT and examined the proportion of women not completing treatment. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine patient, clinical, and facility factors associated with RT incompletion for those who had breast-conserving surgery (BCS), defined as <15 fractions and <3990 centiGray [cGy] (accounting for adoption of hypofractionation), and mastectomy (PMRT, defined as <5000 cGy and <25 fractions), separately. We also examined RT incompletion after BCS using more traditional definitions of <25 fractions and <4500 cGy for diagnosis years ≤2010., Results: Among the 319,003 women who underwent BCS and the 75,331 women who underwent mastectomy and initiated RT, 98.4 and 97.8 % completed radiation, respectively. In adjusted analyses, older age was associated with RT incompletion (odds ratio [O.R.] for age ≥80 = 2.53 for BCS-treated, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.19-2.92; O.R. for PMRT incompletion = 2.33, 95 % CI 1.84-2.96; both versus age <50). In addition, those with ≥2 comorbidities and lower-risk disease had higher odds of RT incompletion. After defining RT completion using more traditional definitions, 94.0 % completed treatment., Conclusions: Reassuringly, we found a very low proportion of patients not completing RT, though we observed a higher likelihood for treatment incompletion in some sub-groups, most notably older women. Further studies should focus on reasons for treatment discontinuation in populations at risk for suboptimal treatment.

Background: The aim of the cost-sharing provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) was to reduce financial barriers for preventive services, including screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and breast cancer (BC) among privately and Medicare-insured individuals. Whether the provision has affected CRC and BC screening prevalence is unknown. The current study investigated whether CRC and BC screening prevalence among privately and Medicare-insured adults by socioeconomic status (SES) changed before and after the ACA., Methods: Data obtained from the National Health Interview Survey pertaining to privately and Medicare-insured adults from 2008 (before the ACA) and 2013 (after the ACA) were used. There were 15,786 adults aged 50 to 75 years in the CRC screening analysis and 14,530 women aged ≥40 years in the BC screening analysis. Changes in guideline-recommended screening between 2008 and 2013 by SES were expressed as the prevalence difference (PD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) adjusted for demographics, insurance, income, education, body mass index, and having a usual provider., Results: Overall, CRC screening prevalence increased from 57.3% to 61.2% between 2008 and 2013 (P<.001). Adjusted CRC screening prevalence during the corresponding period increased in low-income (PD, 5.9; 95% CI, 1.8 to 10.2), least-educated (PD, 7.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 13.5), and Medicare-insured (PD, 6.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 10.7) individuals, but not in high-income, most-educated, and privately insured respondents. BC screening remained unchanged overall (70.5% in 2008 vs 70.2% in 2013) and in the low SES groups., Conclusions: Increases in CRC screening prevalence between 2008 and 2013 were confined to respondents with low SES. These findings may in part reflect the ACA's removal of financial barriers., (© 2015 American Cancer Society.)

Background: While effects of age, race, place of residence, and marital status on receipt of treatment among female breast cancer patients have been well documented, place of birth is a relatively less studied factor. The purpose of our study was to assess the relationship between birth place and type of surgery performed for early-stage breast cancer among US women of different racial and ethnic backgrounds., Methods: Eligible cases (n=119,560) were selected from the SEER registries for the period 2004-2009. US-born and foreign-born patients of different racial/ethnic groups were compared to US-born non-Hispanic Whites (NHW) with respect to receipt of breast conserving surgery (BCS) or mastectomy. Results of multivariable logistic regression analyses were expressed as adjusted odds ratios (OR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI)., Results: The proportion of BCS was highest in foreign-born Whites (62.5%) and lowest in foreign-born Asians (50.3%). Relative to US-born NHW, BCS was more common in foreign-born Whites (OR=1.21. 95% CI: 1.15-1.28) and foreign-born Blacks (OR=1.21. 95% CI: 1.15-1.28). In contrast, foreign-born Asians received less BCS compared to both US-born NHW (OR=.76, 95% CI: .72-0.80) and US-born Asians (OR=.74, 95% CI: .64-.86)., Conclusions: Foreign-born Asian breast cancer patients are less likely to receive BSC compared to US-born Whites or Asian-Americans, whereas foreign-born Whites and foreign-born Blacks are more likely to receive BCS than US-born Whites. Further studies are needed to understand cultural and or health systems factors that may explain these observations.

Previous studies have reported that the prevalence of ER-negative tumors in breast cancer patients is much higher in black women than in white women in the US. Herein, we examine whether the proportion (prevalence) in Africa-born black breast cancer patients residing in the US is similar to those in US-born black patients. We obtained information on invasive female breast cancers diagnosed during 1996-2008 in 17 Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results cancer registries according to select place of birth: Western-Africa-born, Eastern-Africa-born, Jamaica-born, and US-born blacks and US-born whites. The majority of Western-Africa-born and Eastern-Africa-born blacks were from Nigeria (64 %) and Ethiopia (74 %), respectively. We examined group variations in ER status using Chi-squared tests and the prevalence of ER-negative tumors in Africa-born blacks compared to US-born blacks, expressed as prevalence ratio (PRR), using multivariable regression models. The prevalence of ER-negative tumors significantly varied from 22.0 % (n = 41/186) in Eastern-Africa-born to 32.9 % (n = 47/143) in Western-Africa-born blacks. After adjustment for differences in age at diagnosis and other covariates, compared to US-born blacks, the prevalence was similar in Western-Africa-born (PRR = 0.87; 95 % CI 0.70-1.08) and Jamaica-born blacks (PRR = 0.88; 95 % CI 0.74-1.03), but significantly lower in Eastern-Africa-born blacks (PRR = 0.58; 95 % CI 0.44-0.75). Notably, the ER-negative prevalence in Eastern-Africa-born black was comparable to the US-born whites with breast cancer. Our findings highlight the heterogeneity of breast cancer among black women in the US, which should be considered in future studies of hormone receptor status in these women.

Access to timely treatment may be one contributing factor to survival differences by race/ethnicity among breast cancer patients. In this study, we examined the relationship between race and treatment delay among breast cancer patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2006 with Stage I-III breast cancer from the National Cancer Database (n=250,007). We evaluated factors associated with receipt of initial treatment more than 30, 60, and 90 days after biopsy using multivariable log binomial models to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The average time to treatment was 34.30 days (±31.77). Independent of health insurance, stage at diagnosis, and age, Black and Hispanic patients had higher risks of 30, 60, and 90-day treatment delay compared with White patients. Further studies are needed to define the role of structural, health system, physician, clinical and patient factors in treatment delay among Black and Hispanic women and appropriate interventions.

Purpose: Previous studies have indicated poorer survival among women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy > 90 days after surgery compared with women receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 90 days of surgery., Patients and Methods: Women diagnosed between 2004 and 2006 with invasive breast cancer (stages I to III) and treated with surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy were selected from the National Cancer Database (n = 107,587). We evaluated factors associated with prolonged time to start adjuvant chemotherapy (≥ 60 and ≥ 90 days after surgical resection) using multivariable log binomial models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs., Results: The average time to adjuvant chemotherapy was 41.46 days (± 24.46 days). Overall, 85.2% and 95.8% of women received adjuvant chemotherapy within 60 and 90 days of surgery, respectively. African American and Hispanic patients had higher risk of 60-day delay (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.30 to 1.41 and RR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.23 to 1.39, respectively) and 90-day delay (RR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.44 to 1.69 and RR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.26 to 1.59, respectively) compared with white patients. Insurance type, stage, comorbidity, and facility type were also associated with adjuvant chemotherapy delay., Conclusion: The majority of women in our study received adjuvant chemotherapy within the time frame (90 days) for which there is no evidence of poorer outcome. However, the rate of delay varied by patient and by clinical and facility factors. Future studies on the role of structural, physician, clinical, and patient factors in adjuvant chemotherapy delay in populations of women with higher rates of delay and potential interventions are needed.

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, the current American Cancer Society cancer screening guidelines are summarized, and the most current data from the National Health Interview Survey are provided on the utilization of cancer screening for men and women and on the adherence of men and women to multiple recommended screening tests. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the mid-20th century, accumulating evidence has supported the introduction of screening for cancers of the cervix, breast, colon and rectum, prostate (via shared decisions), and lung. The opportunity to detect and treat precursor lesions and invasive disease at a more favorable stage has contributed substantially to reduced incidence, morbidity, and mortality. However, as new discoveries portend advancements in technology and risk-based screening, we fail to fulfill the greatest potential of the existing technology, in terms of both full access among the target population and the delivery of state-of-the art care at each crucial step in the cascade of events that characterize successful cancer screening. There also is insufficient commitment to invest in the development of new technologies, incentivize the development of new ideas, and rapidly evaluate promising new technology. In this report, the authors summarize the status of cancer screening and propose a blueprint for the nation to further advance the contribution of screening to cancer control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each year, the American Cancer Society publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates from the National Health Interview Survey, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this 2018 update, we also summarize the new American Cancer Society colorectal cancer screening guideline and include a clarification in the language of the 2013 lung cancer screening guideline. CA Cancer J Clin 2018;68:297-316. © 2018 American Cancer Society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Each year the American Cancer Society (ACS) publishes a summary of its guidelines for early cancer detection, data and trends in cancer screening rates, and select issues related to cancer screening. In this issue of the journal, we summarize current ACS cancer screening guidelines, including the update of the breast cancer screening guideline, discuss quality issues in colorectal cancer screening and new developments in lung cancer screening, and provide the latest data on utilization of cancer screening from the National Health Interview Survey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]