Beyond the AJR: “Trade-Offs Between Harms and Benefits of Different Breast Cancer Screening Intervals Among Low-Risk Women”

Author(s):  
Victoria L. Mango ◽  
Samantha L. Heller
2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 820-827 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen J. Wernli ◽  
Robert F. Arao ◽  
Rebecca A. Hubbard ◽  
Brian L. Sprague ◽  
Jennifer Alford-Teaster ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e22512-e22512
Author(s):  
Tracy M. Layne ◽  
Parul Agarwal ◽  
Lina Jandorf ◽  
Bruce Rapkin ◽  
Nina A. Bickell

e22512 Background: Differences in breast cancer screening exist between the NYC neighborhoods of East Harlem (EH) and Central Harlem (CH), and the Upper East Side (UES). Here we assess the relationship between six cancer beliefs and breast cancer screening among women in these neighborhoods. Methods: We include women aged ≥40 who responded to the Community Cancer Needs Survey between 2018-2019 and were eligible to undergo screening mammography within 2 years (“recommended screening”). All estimates use weighted data generated using raking techniques. We compared categorical variables using Chi-square tests & estimated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from logistic regression model associating beliefs and reported mammography receipt (results and covariates listed in Table). For each belief, we compared women who reported “agree” (combined strongly or somewhat agree) to those who “disagree” (combined strongly or somewhat disagree). Results: Of the weighted sample of 76,610 (41.3% CH, 34.4% EH, and 24.3% UES) women eligible to undergo screening mammography, 75.1%, 81.2%, and 90.3% of women in CH, EH, and UES, respectively reported recommended screening. There was no difference by neighborhood in prolonged (>2 years ago) screening intervals: 10.6% in CH, 7.9% in EH, and 9.8% in the UES, while never use was reported by 11.3% in CH, 7.6% in EH, and none in the UES (p=<0.0001). The table summarizes agreement between cancer beliefs and timely receipt of mammography. Conclusions: In this study, cancer beliefs are inconsistently associated with use of breast cancer screening across three NYC neighborhoods. Assessment of beliefs reveal important opportunities for breast cancer (and other cancer) prevention by promoting awareness of risk factors and screening in these communities.[Table: see text]


2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 558.1-558
Author(s):  
KJ Wernli ◽  
RF Arao ◽  
RA Hubbard ◽  
BL Sprague ◽  
J Alford-Teaster ◽  
...  

BMC Cancer ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorna McWilliams ◽  
Victoria G. Woof ◽  
Louise S. Donnelly ◽  
Anthony Howell ◽  
D. Gareth Evans ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 147 (11) ◽  
pp. 3059-3067
Author(s):  
Valérie D. V. Sankatsing ◽  
Nicolien T. Ravesteyn ◽  
Eveline A. M. Heijnsdijk ◽  
Mireille J. M. Broeders ◽  
Harry J. Koning

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽  
pp. 38s-38s
Author(s):  
H.L. Bromley ◽  
T.E. Roberts ◽  
D. Petrie ◽  
B.G. Mann ◽  
D. Rea ◽  
...  

Background: Breast cancer screening is effective in reducing breast cancer mortality, but there is increasing concern that it may also lead to overdiagnosis; the detection and treatment of a cancer that would never have presented symptomatically during the woman's lifetime. Conservative management of low-risk breast cancer may reduce the harm of overdiagnosis resulting from mammographic screening programs, yet little is known about how such strategies might impact upon quality of life. Aim: To quantify women's preferences for managing low risk breast cancers identified by breast cancer screening. Methods: Utilities (measures of preference) were obtained from women with and without a history of breast cancer for seven health states reflecting low risk screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) using standard gambles. Demographics and a history of prior screening participation or breast cancer diagnosis were examined as predictors of screening and treatment pathway preferences. Results: Utilities were lower for breast cancers treated with mastectomy or invasive adjuvant treatment. The impact of active monitoring on quality of life was comparable to breast conserving surgery, although women in both patient and general population groups rated active monitoring more favorably as the risk of disease spread was decreased. There was some variation in ratings across patients suggesting that individual risk aversion does affect preferences for the type of conservative management valued. Conclusion: Overdiagnosis remains a challenge for improving the current breast cancer screening program. Active monitoring of low risk ductal carcinoma in situ may provide an acceptable solution for reducing the impact of overdiagnosis and overtreatment resulting from breast cancer screening on quality of life.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Stiggelbout ◽  
Jolyn Hersch ◽  
Tessa Copp ◽  
Gert-Jan Liefers ◽  
Gemma Jacklyn ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 165 (10) ◽  
pp. 700 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Trentham-Dietz ◽  
Karla Kerlikowske ◽  
Natasha K. Stout ◽  
Diana L. Miglioretti ◽  
Clyde B. Schechter ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document