Follow-Up of Abnormal Breast and Colorectal Cancer Screening by Race/Ethnicity

Community Collaboration to Advance Racial/Ethnic Equity in Colorectal Cancer Screening: Protocol for a Multilevel Intervention to Improve Screening and Follow-up in Community Health Centers

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization is low among low-income, uninsured, and minority populations that receive care in community health centers (CHCs). There is a need for evidence-based interventions to increase screening and follow-up care in these settings.

METHODS

A multilevel, multi-component pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial is being conducted at 8 CHCs in two metropolitan areas (Boston and Los Angeles), with two arms: (1) Mailed FIT outreach with text reminders, and (2) Mailed FIT-DNA with patient support. We also include an additional CHC in Rapid City (South Dakota) that follows a parallel protocol for FIT-DNA but is not randomized due to lack of a comparison group. Eligible individuals in participating clinics are primary care patients ages 45-75, at average-risk for CRC, and overdue for CRC screening. Participants with abnormal screening results are offered navigation for follow-up colonoscopy and CRC risk assessment.

RESULTS

The primary outcome is the completion rate of CRC screening at 90 days. Secondary outcomes include the screening completion rate at 180 days and the rate of colonoscopy completion within 6 months among participants with an abnormal result. Additional goals are to enhance our understanding of facilitators and barriers to CRC risk assessment in CHC settings.

CONCLUSIONS

This study assesses the effectiveness of two multilevel interventions to increase screening participation and follow-up after abnormal screening in under-resourced clinical settings, informing future efforts to address CRC disparities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05714644.

Fecal Immunochemical Test Screening and Risk of Colorectal Cancer Death

Importance

The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is widely used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, but evidence of its effectiveness is limited.

Objective

To evaluate whether FIT screening is associated with a lower risk of dying from CRC overall, according to cancer location, and within demographic groups.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This nested case-control study in a cohort of screening-eligible people was conducted in 2 large, integrated health systems of racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse members with long-term programs of mailed FIT screening outreach. Eligible participants included people aged 52 to 85 years who died from colorectal adenocarcinoma between 2011 and 2017 (cases); cases were matched in a 1:8 ratio based on age, sex, health-plan membership duration, and geographic area to randomly selected persons who were alive and CRC-free on case's diagnosis date (controls). Data analysis was conducted from January 2002 to December 2017.

Exposures

Completing 1 or more FIT screenings in the 5-year period prior to the CRC diagnosis date among cases or the corresponding date among controls; in secondary analyses, 2- to 10-year intervals were evaluated.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary study outcome was CRC death overall and by tumor location. Secondary analyses were performed to assess CRC death by race and ethnicity.

Results

From a cohort of 2 127 128 people, a total of 10 711 participants (3529 aged 60-69 years [32.9%]; 5587 male [52.1%] and 5124 female [47.8%]; 1254 non-Hispanic Asian [11.7%]; 973 non-Hispanic Black [9.1%]; 1929 Hispanic or Latino [18.0%]; 6345 non-Hispanic White [59.2%]) was identified, including 1103 cases and 9608 controls. Among controls during the 10-year period prior to the reference date, 6101 (63.5%) completed 1 or more FITs with a cumulative 12.6% positivity rate (768 controls), of whom 610 (79.4%) had a colonoscopy within 1 year. During the 5-year period, 494 cases (44.8%) and 5345 controls (55.6%) completed 1 or more FITs. In regression analysis, completing 1 or more FIT screening was associated with a 33% lower risk of death from CRC (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.59-0.76) and 42% lower risk in the left colon and rectum (aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.48-0.71). There was no association with right colon cancers (aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.69-1.01) but the difference in the estimates between the right colon and left colon or rectum was statistically significant (P = .01). FIT screening was associated with lower CRC mortality risk among non-Hispanic Asian (aOR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.23-0.59), non-Hispanic Black (aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.85) and non-Hispanic White individuals (aOR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.86) (P for homogeneity = .04 for homogeneity).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this nested case-control study, completing FIT was associated with a lower risk of overall death from CRC, particularly in the left colon, and the associations were observed across racial and ethnic groups. These findings support the use of FIT in population-based screening strategies.

Racial Disparities and Strategies for Improving Equity in Diagnostic Follow-Up for Abnormal Screening Mammograms

PURPOSE

Black and White women undergo screening mammography at similar rates, but racial disparities in breast cancer outcomes persist. To assess potential contributors, we investigated delays in follow-up after abnormal imaging by race/ethnicity.

METHODS

Women who underwent screening mammography at our urban academic center from January 2015 to February 2018 and received a Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System 0 assessment were included. Kaplan-Meier estimates described distributions of time between diagnostic events from (1) screening to diagnostic imaging and (2) diagnostic imaging to biopsy. Multivariable logistic regression models estimated the associations between race/ethnicity and receipt of follow-up within 15 and 30 days.

RESULTS

Two thousand five hundred and fifty-four women were included (48.6% non-Hispanic [NH] Black, 38.2% NH White, 13.1% other/unknown). Median time between screening and diagnostic imaging varied by race/ethnicity (White: 7 days [IQR, 2-14]; Black: 12 days [IQR, 7-23]; other/unknown: 9 days [IQR, 5-21]). There were similar disparities in days between diagnostic imaging and biopsy (White: 12 [IQR, 7-24]; Black: 21 [IQR, 13-37]; other/unknown: 16 [IQR, 9-30]) and between screening and biopsy (White: 20 [IQR, 11-41]; Black: 35 [IQR, 22-63]; other/unknown: 27.5 [IQR, 17-42]). After adjustment, odds of diagnostic imaging follow-up within 15 days of screening were lower for Black versus White women (odds ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.80]; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In this diverse cohort, disparities in timely diagnostic follow-up after abnormal breast screening were observed, with Black women waiting 1.75 times as long as White women to obtain a tissue diagnosis. National guidelines for time to diagnostic follow-up may facilitate more timely breast cancer care and potentially affect outcomes.

Effect of neighborhood and individual-level socioeconomic factors on breast cancer screening adherence in a multi-ethnic study

BACKGROUND

Although mammography can significantly reduce breast cancer mortality, many women do not receive their annual breast cancer screening. Differences in screening adherence exist by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and insurance status. However, more detailed investigations into the impact of neighborhood disadvantage and access to resources on screening adherence are lacking.

METHODS

We comprehensively examined the effect of individual social, economic, and demographic factors (n = 34 variables), as well as neighborhood level SES (nSES) indicators (n = 10 variables) on breast cancer screening adherence across a multi-ethnic population (n = 472). In this cross-sectional study, participants were surveyed from 2017 to 2018. The data was analyzed using univariate regression and LASSO for variable reduction. Significant predictors were carried forward into final multivariable mixed-effect logistic regression models where odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals and p-values were reported.

RESULTS

Nineteen percent of participants were non-adherent to breast screening guidelines. Race/ethnicity was not associated with adherence; however, increasing age (OR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.95-0.99, p = 0.01), renting a home (OR = 0.53, 95%CI = 0.30-0.94, p = 0.04), food insecurity (OR 0.46, 95%CI = 0.22-0.94, p = 0.01), and overcrowding (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.32-0.94, p = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower breast cancer screening adherence.

CONCLUSION

Socioeconomic indicators at the individual and neighborhood levels impact low breast cancer screening adherence and may help to inform future screening interventions.

Together We Go Farther: Improving Access to Cancer Screening Through a Multidisciplinary, One-Stop-Shop Approach

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Despite significant scientific advances in cancer treatment in recent decades, Black Americans still face marked inequities in cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment. Redressing these persistent inequities will require innovative strategies for community engagement. Radiologists, as experts in cancer screening and diagnosis for multiple malignancies, including breast, lung, and colon, are ideally suited to lead and implement community-based strategies to address local cancer disparities.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Through an established academic-community partnership in West Philadelphia built over the course of multiple prior community healthcare events, the authors piloted a novel radiology-led multidisciplinary approach to improve access to cancer screening for the predominantly Black, medically-underserved residents. Using a "one-stop-shop" framework to provide a comprehensive suite of screening and ancillary services in the heart of the community, the authors sought to remove as many impediments to screening as possible.

RESULTS

Approximately 350 participants attended the health fair, and a total of 232 screening tests or assessments were completed. Data from this event suggest that this inclusive approach, as well as the use of a health fair "passport" to incentivize engagement, can successfully improve access to screening and follow-up in an underserved community.

CONCLUSION

This "one-stop-shop" community approach can be replicated by radiology-led teams in other settings as a high-value, scalable opportunity to reduce disparities in access to cancer screening.

Primary Care Provider Receptivity to Multi-Cancer Early Detection Test Use in Cancer Screening

Multi-cancer early detection tests (MCEDs) are blood-based tests that detect biomarkers released or induced by cancer cells. If MCED tests are shown to be safe and effective in cancer screening, they are likely to be ordered and managed in primary care. To understand primary care providers' support for and concerns about the implementation and management of MCED testing, the research team developed a cross-sectional survey that was sent to 939 primary care providers (physicians, residents/fellows, and advanced practice providers) in a large academic health system in the greater Philadelphia area. The survey included standard items used to assess provider background characteristics and to measure provider awareness of challenges related to MCED test use (7 items), perceived competence in MCED testing (5 items), and receptivity to MCED test use in the future (4 items). A total of 351 (37.4%) primary care providers completed the survey. Among respondents, the awareness of challenges in MCED testing (mean = 3.95, sd = 0.64), perceived competence (3.67, sd = 0.85), and receptivity to MCED use in practice (mean = 3.62, 0.75) were moderately high. Multiple regression was performed to identify factors associated with receptivity to MCED testing. We found that provider number of years in practice (DATA), awareness of challenges related to MCED testing (DATA), and perceived competence in MCED test use (DATA) were positively and significantly associated with receptivity to MCED test use in practice. An exploratory factor analysis extracted two components: receptivity to MCEDs and awareness of challenges. Surprisingly, these factors had a positive correlation (r = 0.124, p = 0.024). Providers' perceived competence in using MCED tests and providers' experience level were significantly associated with receptivity to MCED testing. While there was strong agreement with potential challenges to implementing MCEDs, PCPs were generally receptive to using MCEDs in cancer screening. Keeping PCPs updated on the evolving knowledge of MCEDs is likely critical to building receptivity to MCED testing.

Black-White disparities in colorectal cancer outcomes: a simulation study of screening benefit

The US Black population has higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence rates and worse CRC survival than the US White population, as well as historically lower rates of CRC screening. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results incidence rate data in people diagnosed between the ages of 20 and 45 years, before routine CRC screening is recommended, were analyzed to estimate temporal changes in CRC risk in Black and White populations. There was a rapid rise in rectal and distal colon cancer incidence in the White population but not the Black population, and little change in proximal colon cancer incidence for both groups. In 2014-2018, CRC incidence per 100 000 was 17.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 15.3 to 19.9) among Black individuals aged 40-44 years and 16.6 (95% CI = 15.6 to 17.6) among White individuals aged 40-44 years; 42.3% of CRCs diagnosed in Black patients were proximal colon cancer, and 41.1% of CRCs diagnosed in White patients were rectal cancer. Analyses used a race-specific microsimulation model to project screening benefits, based on life-years gained and lifetime reduction in CRC incidence, assuming these Black-White differences in CRC risk and location. The projected benefits of screening (via either colonoscopy or fecal immunochemical testing) were greater in the Black population, suggesting that observed Black-White differences in CRC incidence are not driven by differences in risk. Projected screening benefits were sensitive to survival assumptions made for Black populations. Building racial disparities in survival into the model reduced projected screening benefits, which can bias policy decisions.

Engaging Black sexual minority women in breast cancer research: Lessons in community partnerships

BACKGROUND

Black sexual minority women (BSMW) face significant breast cancer health inequities and are underrepresented in health research because of historical and present-day exclusion. However, there exists no peer-reviewed literature on best practices for the inclusion of BSMW in cancer research. "Our Breast Health: The Access Project" was a national primary data collection study in June 2018 through October 2019 that aimed to identify facilitators and barriers to breast cancer care among BSMW, and that successfully recruited the highest number of BSMW for any national breast cancer screening study at the time of its publication.

METHODS

The present analysis highlights best practices for reaching BSMW by examining by how effective various recruitment sources were at recruiting BSMW. Recruitment partners were grouped into several categories: (1) cancer focused, (2) Black women or sexual minority women focused, (3) BSMW focused, (4) social media, and (5) other. Then logistic regression was used to estimate the odds that a particular recruitment source category could recruit BSMW compared with other categories.

RESULTS

Partnerships with community-based organizations led by and intended for BSMW were the most successful at recruiting BSMW, demonstrating the importance of an intersectional approach to recruitment. Community-based organizations focused on BSMW specifically were 26 times more successful in recruiting BSMW to the study compared with recruiting Black women who were not sexual minorities (odds ratio, 26.43 [95% CI, 7.50-93.10]).

CONCLUSIONS

Successful recruitment enables breast cancer research grounded in the perspectives of BSMW, which can generate key findings that have the potential to remedy longstanding health inequities for this population.

Sources of Disparities in Surveillance Mammography Performance and Risk-Guided Recommendations for Supplemental Breast Imaging: A Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

Surveillance mammography is recommended for all women with a history of breast cancer. Risk-guided surveillance incorporating advanced imaging modalities based on individual risk of a second cancer could improve cancer detection. However, personalized surveillance may also amplify disparities.

METHODS

In simulated populations using inputs from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC), we investigated race- and ethnicity-based disparities. Disparities were decomposed into those due to primary breast cancer and treatment characteristics, social determinants of health (SDOH) and differential error in second cancer ascertainment by modeling populations with or without variation across race and ethnicity in the distribution of these characteristics. We estimated effects of disparities on mammography performance and supplemental imaging recommendations stratified by race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

In simulated cohorts based on 65,446 BCSC surveillance mammograms, when only cancer characteristics varied by race and ethnicity, mammograms for Black women had lower sensitivity compared with the overall population (64.1% vs. 71.1%). Differences between Black women and the overall population were larger when both cancer characteristics and SDOH varied by race and ethnicity (53.8% vs. 71.1%). Basing supplemental imaging recommendations on high predicted second cancer risk resulted in less frequent recommendations for Hispanic (6.7%) and Asian/Pacific Islander women (6.4%) compared with the overall population (10.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Variation in cancer characteristics and SDOH led to disparities in surveillance mammography performance and recommendations for supplemental imaging.

IMPACT

Risk-guided surveillance imaging may exacerbate disparities. Decision-makers should consider implications for equity in cancer outcomes resulting from implementing risk-guided screening programs. See related In the Spotlight, p. 1479.

Predictive biomarkers for colorectal cancer: a state-of-the-art systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a substantial health burden, with early detection paramount for improved prognosis. This study aims to evaluate potential CRC biomarkers and detection techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This systematic review, reported in adherence to PRISMA Statement 2020 guidelines, collates the latest research on potential biomarkers and detection/prognosis methods for CRC, spanning the last decade.

RESULTS

Out of the 38 included studies, diverse biomarkers and detection methods emerged, with DNA methylation markers like SFRP2 and SDC2, microRNAs including miR-1290, miR-506, and miR-4316, and serum and plasma markers such as NTS levels and U2 snRNA fragments standing out. Methylated cfDNA and m5C methylation alteration in immune cells of the blood, along with circular RNA, showed promise as diagnostic markers. Meanwhile, techniques involving extracellular vesicles and lateral flow immunoassays exhibited potential for swift and effective CRC screening.

DISCUSSION

Our state-of-the-art review identifies potential biomarkers, including SFRP2, SDC2, miR-1290, miR-506, miR-4316, and U2 snRNA fragments, with significant potential in enhancing CRC detection. However, comprehensive validation studies and a rigorous evaluation of clinical utility and cost-effectiveness remain necessary before integration into routine clinical practice.

CONCLUSION

The findings emphasize the need for continued research into biomarkers and detection methods to improve patient outcomes.

Equitable Implementation of Mailed Stool Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening and Patient Navigation in a Safety Net Health System

BACKGROUND

Mailed stool testing programs increase colorectal cancer (CRC) screening in diverse settings, but whether uptake differs by key demographic characteristics is not well-studied and has health equity implications.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the uptake and equity of the first cycle of a mailed stool test program implemented over a 3-year period in a Central Texas Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) system.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study within a single-arm intervention.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients in an FQHC aged 50-75 at average CRC risk identified through electronic health records (EHR) as not being up to date with screening.

INTERVENTIONS

Mailed outreach in English/Spanish included an introductory letter, free-of-charge fecal immunochemical test (FIT), and lab requisition with postage-paid mailer, simple instructions, and a medical records update postcard. Patients were asked to complete the FIT or postcard reporting recent screening. One text and one letter reminded non-responders. A bilingual patient navigator guided those with positive FIT toward colonoscopy.

MAIN MEASURES

Proportions of patients completing mailed FIT in response to initial cycle of outreach and proportion of those with positive FIT completing colonoscopy; comparison of whether proportions varied by demographics and insurance status obtained from the EHR.

KEY RESULTS

Over 3 years, 33,606 patients received an initial cycle of outreach. Overall, 19.9% (n = 6672) completed at least one mailed FIT, 5.6% (n = 374) tested positive during that initial cycle, and 72.5% (n = 271 of 374) of those with positive FIT completed a colonoscopy. Hispanic/Latinx, Spanish-speaking, and uninsured patients were more likely to complete mailed FIT compared with white, English-speaking, and commercially insured patients. Spanish-speaking patients were more likely to complete colonoscopy after positive FIT compared with English-speaking patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Mailed FIT outreach with patient navigation implemented in an FQHC system was effective in equitably reaching patients not up to date for CRC screening.

Breast cancer screening during the COVID-19 pandemic: moving from disparities to health equity

The COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented disruptions to routine health care in the United States. Screening mammography, a cornerstone of breast cancer control and prevention, was completely halted in the spring of 2020, and screening programs have continued to face challenges with subsequent COVID-19 waves. Although screening mammography rates decreased for all women during the pandemic, a number of studies have now clearly documented that reductions in screening have been greater for some populations than others. Specifically, minoritized women have been screened at lower rates than White women across studies, although the specific patterns of disparity vary depending on the populations and communities studied. We posit that these disparities are likely due to a variety of structural and contextual factors, including the differential impact of COVID-19 on communities. We also outline key considerations for closing gaps in screening mammography. First, practices, health systems, and communities must measure screening mammography use to identify whether gaps exist and which populations are most affected. Second, we propose that strategies to close disparities in breast cancer screening must be multifaceted, targeting the health system or practice, but also structural factors at the policy level. Health disparities arise from a complex set of conditions, and multimodal solutions that address the complex, multifactorial conditions that lead to disparities may be more likely to succeed and are necessary for promoting health equity.

Extent of Follow-Up on Abnormal Cancer Screening in Multiple California Public Hospital Systems: A Retrospective Review

BACKGROUND

Inequitable follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests may contribute to racial/ethnic disparities in colon and breast cancer outcomes. However, few multi-site studies have examined follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests and it is unknown if racial/ethnic disparities exist.

OBJECTIVE

This report describes patterns of performance on follow-up of abnormal colon and breast cancer screening tests and explores the extent to which racial/ethnic disparities exist in public hospital systems.

DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from five California public hospital systems. We used multivariable robust Poisson regression analyses to examine whether patient-level factors or site predicted receipt of follow-up test.

MAIN MEASURES

Using data from five public hospital systems between July 2015 and June 2017, we assessed follow-up of two screening results: (1) colonoscopy after positive fecal immunochemical tests (FIT) and (2) tissue biopsy within 21 days after a BIRADS 4/5 mammogram.

KEY RESULTS

Of 4132 abnormal FITs, 1736 (42%) received a follow-up colonoscopy. Older age, Medicaid insurance, lack of insurance, English language, and site were negatively associated with follow-up colonoscopy, while Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were positively associated with follow-up colonoscopy. Of 1702 BIRADS 4/5 mammograms, 1082 (64%) received a timely biopsy; only site was associated with timely follow-up biopsy.

CONCLUSION

Despite the vulnerabilities of public-hospital-system patients, follow-up of abnormal cancer screening tests occurs at rates similar to that of patients in other healthcare settings, with colon cancer screening test follow-up occurring at lower rates than follow-up of breast cancer screening tests. Site-level factors have larger, more consistent impact on follow-up rates than patient sociodemographic traits. Resources are needed to identify health system-level factors, such as test follow-up processes or data infrastructure, that improve abnormal cancer screening test follow-up so that effective health system-level interventions can be evaluated and disseminated.

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.

Delays in Follow-up Care for Abnormal Mammograms in Mobile Mammography Versus Fixed-Clinic Patients

BACKGROUND

Mobile mammographic services (MM) have been shown to increase breast cancer screening in medically underserved women. However, little is known about MM patients' adherence to follow-up of abnormal mammograms and how this compares with patients from traditional, fixed clinics.

OBJECTIVES

To assess delays in follow-up of abnormal mammograms in women screened using MM versus fixed clinics.

DESIGN

Electronic medical record review of abnormal screening mammograms.

SUBJECTS

Women screened on a MM van or at a fixed clinic with an abnormal radiographic result in 2019 (N = 1,337).

MAIN MEASURES

Our outcome was delay in follow-up of an abnormal mammogram of 60 days or greater. Guided by Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Utilization, we assessed the following: predisposing (age, ethnicity, marital status, preferred language), enabling (insurance, provider referral, clinic site), and need (personal breast cancer history, family history of breast/ovarian cancer) factors.

KEY RESULTS

Only 45% of MM patients had obtained recommended follow-up within 60 days of an abnormal screening compared to 72% of fixed-site patients (p < .001). After adjusting for predisposing, enabling, and need factors, MM patients were 2.1 times more likely to experience follow-up delays than fixed-site patients (CI: 1.5-3.1; p < .001). African American (OR: 1.5; CI: 1.0-2.1; p < .05) and self-referred (OR: 1.8; CI: 1.2-2.8; p < .01) women were significantly more likely to experience delays compared to Non-Hispanic White women or women with a provider referral, respectively. Women who were married (OR: 0.63; CI: 0.5-0.9; p < .01), had breast cancer previously (OR: 0.37; CI: 0.2-0.8; p < .05), or had a family history of breast/ovarian cancer (OR: 0.76; CI: 0.6-0.9; p < .05) were less likely to experience delayed care compared to unmarried women, women with no breast cancer history, or women without a family history of breast/ovarian cancer, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of women screened using MM had follow-up delays. Women who are African American, self-referred, or unmarried are particularly at risk of experiencing delays in care for an abnormal mammogram.

US Cancer Screening Recommendations: Developments and the Impact of COVID-19

The USPSTF and ACS recommend screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancers. Rates of cancer screening, diagnosis, and treatment decreased significantly in the US and other developed nations during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown (April 2020) and have since recovered, although not to baseline levels in many cases. For breast cancer, the USPSTF recommends biennial screening with mammography for women aged 50−74, while the ACS recommends annual screening for women aged 45−54, who may transition to biennial after 55. Minority and rural populations have lower rates of screening and lower utilization of DBT, which offers superior sensitivity and specificity. Among 20 US health networks in April 2020, mammography rates were down 89.2% and new breast cancer diagnoses down by 50.5%. For cervical cancer, the USPSTF recommends cervical cytology every three years for women 21−65, or cytology+hrHPV co-testing every five years for women aged 30−65. Cervical cancer screening rates declined by 87% in April 2020 and recovered to a 40% decline by June 2020, with American Indians and Asians most severely affected. For colorectal cancer (CRC), the USPSTF and ACS recommend screening for ages 45−75, recently lowered from a starting age of 50. Most commonly-used modalities include annual FIT testing, FIT+DNA testing every three years, and colonoscopy every ten years, with shorter repeat if polyps are found. In the US, CRC screenings were down by 79−84.5% in April 2020 across several retrospective studies. Patient encounters for CRC were down by 39.9%, and a UK-based model predicted that 5-year-survival would decrease by 6.4%. The USPSTF recommends screening low dose CT scans (LDCTs) for ages 50−80 with a >20 pack-year smoking history who have smoked within the past 15 years. In April 2020, screening LDCTs fell by 72−78% at one US institution and lung cancer diagnoses were down 39.1%.

Factors affecting the follow-up time after a positive result in the fecal occult blood test

In 2010, Taiwan included the fecal occult blood test (FOBT) under preventive health insurance services. For patients whose test positive, receiving follow-ups is paramount. This study investigated factors affecting the follow-up time of these patients. This retrospective study used data from the colorectal cancer screening archives. The study period was from 2010 to 2013, and the subjects were 50-75-year-old persons who tested positive for FOBT. The t test, one-way ANOVA, and multiple regression were performed to address the differences in the mean tracking period between variables such as the population's demographic characteristics. The mean follow-up time for the 98,482 participants whose screening results were positive exhibited significant differences (p < 0.001) according to medical unit region and classification, age, screening location, family history, examination method, and diagnosis. The model predicting the mean follow-up time predicted a period of 10.079 days longer for those whose hospital was on an offshore island than that of those whose hospital was in the eastern regions. The follow-up time was 1.257 days shorter for people who were inpatients than those who were outpatients and was 8.902 days longer for people who underwent double contrast barium enema plus flexible sigmoidoscopy than those who underwent other examination methods. Patients with a family history of colorectal cancer and those whose examination results indicated cancer had a follow-up time of 2.562 and 2.476 days shorter than those who did not know their family history and those with other results, respectively. Factors affecting the follow-up time of people whose FOBT results were positive consisted of the location and classification of the follow-up institution, age, screening location, family history, examination method, and diagnosis. This provides valuable references for improving the cancer screening program.

Delays in breast cancer care by race and sexual orientation: Results from a national survey with diverse women in the United States

BACKGROUND

Despite known differences in breast cancer by both race and sexual orientation, data on the intersectional experiences of Black sexual minority women (BSMW) along the care continuum are scant. This study sought to understand delays in breast cancer care by examining the intersection of race and sexual orientation.

METHODS

This online, cross-sectional survey enrolled racially and sexually diverse women aged ≥ 35 years who had been diagnosed with breast cancer within the prior 10 years or had an abnormal screening in the prior 24 months. The authors calculated summary statistics by race/sexual orientation categories, and they conducted univariate and multivariable modeling by using multiple imputation for missing data.

RESULTS

BSMW (n = 101) had the highest prevalence of care delays with 5.17-fold increased odds of a care delay in comparison with White heterosexual women (n = 298) in multivariable models. BSMW reported higher intersectional stigma and lower social support than all other groups. In models adjusted for race, sexual orientation, and income, intersectional stigma was associated with a 2.43-fold increase in care delays, and social support was associated with a 32% decrease in the odds of a care delay.

CONCLUSIONS

Intersectional stigma may be an important driver of breast cancer inequities for BSMW. Reducing stigma and ensuring access to appropriate social support that addresses known barriers can be an important approach to reducing inequities in the breast cancer care continuum.

Beyond Black and White: race and sexual identity as contributors to healthcare system distrust after breast cancer screening among US women

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare system distrust (HCSD) has been linked to poor breast cancer outcomes. Previous HSCD analyses have focused on Black-White disparities; however, focusing only on race ignores the complex set of factors that form identity. We quantified the contributions of race and sexual minority (SM) identity to HCSD among US women who had received breast cancer screening.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used intersectionality decomposition methods to assess the degree to which racial and SM identity contributed to disparate responses to the validated 9-item HCSD Scale. The sample included online survey participants identifying as a Black or White woman living in the US, with a self-reported abnormal breast cancer screening result in the past 24 months and/or breast cancer diagnosis since 2011.

RESULTS

Of 649 participants, 49.4% of Black SM women (n = 85) were in the highest HCSD tertile, followed by 37.4% of White SM women (n = 123), 24.4% of Black heterosexual women (n = 156), and 19% of White heterosexual women. Controlling for age, 72% of the disparity in HCSD between Black SM women and White heterosexual women was due to SM status, 23% was due to racial identity, and 3% was due to both racial and SM identity.

CONCLUSIONS

SM identity emerged as the largest driver of HCSD disparities; however, the combined racial and SM disparity persisted. Excluding sexual identity in HCSD studies may miss an important contributor. Interventions designed to increase the HCS's trustworthiness at the provider and system levels should address both racism and homophobia.

A Quality Improvement Intervention Leveraging a Safety Net Model for Surveillance Colonoscopy Completion

Systems to address follow-up testing of clinically positive surveillance colonoscopy results are lacking. The impact of an ambulatory safety net (ASN) intervention on rates of colonoscopy completion was assessed. The ASN team identified patients using an electronic registry, conducted patient outreach, coordinated care, and tracked colonoscopy completion. In all, 701 patients were captured in the ASN program: 58.1% (407/701) had possible barriers to follow-up colonoscopy completion, with rates of 80.1% (236/294) if no barrier, and 40.9% (287/701) overall. Colonoscopy completion likelihood increased with prior polypectomy (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.3), and decreased with White race (OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.3-0.9), increased inpatient visits (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.4-0.9), more outreach attempts (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7), and fair/poor/inadequate preparation (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7) in logistic regression models. An ASN model for quality improvement promotes colonoscopy completion rates and identifies patient barriers.

"This is some mess right here": Exploring interactions between Black sexual minority women and health care providers for breast cancer screening and care

BACKGROUND

Few studies have explored how the intersection of race and sexual identity contribute to breast cancer disparities for Black sexual minority women (SMW). Issues within patient-provider relationships, including bias, contribute to health disparities for minority groups. The authors used constructs from self-determination theory (SDT) to explore the nature of health care provider interactions in breast cancer screening and care among Black SMW.

METHODS

Participants were sampled nationally through social media, targeted emails, and referrals. Qualitative, in-depth interviews were conducted with 15 Black cisgender SMW, ages 38 to 64 years, who had a breast cancer diagnosis or recent abnormal mammogram. Interviews were conducted face-to-face or online, audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Two analysts coded the interviews. Codes were analyzed across interviews to identify themes salient to SDT.

RESULTS

Themes aligned with the SDT constructs of relatedness and autonomy. Some participants discussed feeling most understood by Black and/or female providers who shared at least 1 of their identities. Feeling understood through shared identity contributed to participants feeling seen and heard by their providers. Participants who discussed negative experiences with providers believed that the provider made negative assumptions about them based on their race and/or sexual orientation.

CONCLUSIONS

When interacting with health care providers for breast cancer screening and care, Black SMW face specific challenges related to their multiply marginalized social position. Reducing health care provider bias toward Black SMW may improve patients' desires to continue in care. Providing equitable care while acknowledging and respecting women with multiply marginalized identities may improve the nature of these interactions.

Framework and Strategies to Eliminate Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes

Preventable differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality across racial/ethnic, economic, geographic, and other groups can be eliminated by assuring equitable access and quality across the care continuum, but few interventions have been demonstrated to do so. Multicomponent strategies designed with a health equity framework may be effective. A health equity framework takes into account social determinants of health, multilevel influences (policy, community, delivery, and individual levels), screening processes, and community engagement. Effective strategies for increasing screening uptake include patient navigation and other interventions for structural barriers, reminders and clinical decision support, and data to continuously track metrics and guide targets for improvement. Community resource gaps should be addressed to assure high-quality services irrespective of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status. One model combinespopulation-based proactive outreach screening with screening delivery at in-person or virtual points of contact, as well as community engagement. Patient- and provider-based behavioral interventions may be considered for increasing screening demand and delivery. Providing a choice of screening tests is recommended for CRC screening, and access to colonoscopy is required for completion of the CRC screening process.

Variation in Colorectal Cancer Stage and Mortality across Large Community-Based Populations: PORTAL Colorectal Cancer Cohort

INTRODUCTION

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality can be reduced by effective screening and/or treatment. However, the influence of health care systems on disparities among insured patients is largely unexplored.

METHODS

To evaluate insured patients with CRC diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 across 6 diverse US health care systems in the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) Patient Outcomes Research To Advance Learning (PORTAL) CRC cohort, we contrasted CRC stage; CRC mortality; all-cause mortality; and influences of demographics, stage, comorbidities, and treatment between health systems.

RESULTS

Among 16,211 patients with CRC, there were significant differences between health care systems in CRC stage at diagnosis, CRC-specific mortality, and all-cause mortality. The unadjusted risk of CRC mortality varied from 27% lower to 21% higher than the reference system (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.73, 95% confidence interval = 0.66-0.80 to HR = 1.21, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.40; p < 0.01 across systems). Significant differences persisted after adjustment for demographics and comorbidities (p < 0.01); however, adjustment for stage eliminated significant differences (p = 0.24). All-cause mortality among patients with CRC differed approximately 30% between health care systems (HR = 0.89-1.17; p < 0.01). Adjustment for age eliminated significant differences (p = 0.48).

DISCUSSION

Differences in CRC survival between health care systems were largely explained by stage at diagnosis, not demographics, comorbidity, or treatment. Given that stage is strongly related to early detection, these results suggest that variation in CRC screening systems represents a modifiable systems-level factor for reducing disparities in CRC survival.

Early Screening of African Americans (45-50 Years Old) in a Fecal Immunochemical Test-Based Colorectal Cancer Screening Program

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Some guidelines recommend starting colorectal cancer (CRC) screening before age 50 years for African Americans, but there are few data on screening uptake and yield in this population.

METHODS

We performed a prospective study of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) screening among African American members of the Kaiser Permanente Northern California health plan. We compared data from African American members screened when they were 45-50 years old (early screening group) in 2018 with data from previously unscreened African American, white, Hispanic, and Asian/Pacific Islander health plan members who were 51-56 years old. Screening outreach was performed with mailed FIT kits. Logistic regression models, adjusted for sex, were used to evaluate differences among groups in screening uptake, colonoscopy follow-up of abnormal test results, and test yield.

RESULTS

Among 10,232 African Americans in the early screening group who were mailed a FIT, screening was completed by 33.1%. Among the 4% with positive test results, 85.3% completed a follow-up colonoscopy: 57.8% had any adenoma, 33.6% had an advanced adenoma (adenoma with advanced histology or polyp ≥10 mm), and 2.6% were diagnosed with CRC. African Americans in the early screening group were modestly more likely to have completed screening than previously unscreened African Americans, whites, and Hispanics 51-56 years old. The groups did not differ significantly in positive results from the FIT (range, 3.8%-4.6%) and more than 74% received a follow-up colonoscopy after a positive test result. The test yields for any adenoma (range, 56.7%-70.7%), advanced adenoma (range, 20.0%-33.6%), and CRC (range, 0%-7.1%) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Proportions of African Americans who participated in early (aged 45-50 years) FIT screening and test yield were comparable to those of previously unscreened African Americans, whites, Hispanics, and Asian/Pacific Islanders who were 51-56 years old.

Implementing a multilevel intervention to accelerate colorectal cancer screening and follow-up in federally qualified health centers using a stepped wedge design: a study protocol

Background

Screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) not only detects disease early when treatment is more effective but also prevents cancer by finding and removing precancerous polyps. Because many of our nation’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable individuals obtain health care at federally qualified health centers, these centers play a significant role in increasing CRC screening among the most vulnerable populations. Furthermore, the full benefits of cancer screenings must include timely and appropriate follow-up of abnormal results. Thus, the purpose of this study is to implement a multilevel intervention to increase rates of CRC screening, follow-up, and referral-to-care in federally qualified health centers, as well as simultaneously to observe and to gather information on the implementation process to improve the adoption, implementation, and sustainment of the intervention. The multilevel intervention will target three different levels of influences: organization, provider, and individual. It will have multiple components, including provider and staff education, provider reminder, provider assessment and feedback, patient reminder, and patient navigation.

Methods

This study is a multilevel, three-phase, stepped wedge cluster randomized trial with four clusters of clinics from four different FQHC systems. In the first phase, there will be a 3-month waiting period during which no intervention components will be implemented. After the 3-month waiting period, we will randomize two clusters to cross from the control to the intervention and the remaining two clusters to follow 3 months later. All clusters will stay at the same phase for 9 months, followed by a 3-month transition period, and then cross over to the next phase.

Discussion

There is a pressing need to reduce disparities in CRC outcomes, especially among racial/ethnic minority populations and among populations who live in poverty. Single-level interventions are often insufficient to lead to sustainable changes. Multilevel interventions, which target two or more levels of changes, are needed to address multilevel contextual influences simultaneously. Multilevel interventions with multiple components will affect not only the desired outcomes but also each other. How to take advantage of multilevel interventions and how to implement such interventions and evaluate their effectiveness are the ultimate goals of this study.

Trial registration

This protocol is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04514341) on 14 August 2020.

Impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer disparities and the way forward

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the U.S. Surgeon General advised all hospitals and ambulatory care centers to delay nonurgent medical procedures and surgeries. This recommendation, echoed by a multigastroenterology society guideline, led to the suspension of colonoscopies for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance. Although this temporary suspension was necessary to contain COVID-19 infections, we as gastroenterologists, patient advocates, and CRC researchers have witnessed the downstream impact of COVID-19 and this recommendation on CRC screening, research, and advocacy. These effects are particularly noticeable in medically underserved communities where CRC morbidity and mortality are highest. COVID-19-related pauses in medical care, as well as shifts in resource allocation and workforce deployment, threaten decades worth of work to improve CRC disparities in medically underserved populations. In this perspective, we present the unique challenges COVID-19 poses to health equity in CRC prevention and provide potential solutions as we navigate these uncharted waters.

Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium

BACKGROUND

Cancer screening is a complex process encompassing risk assessment, the initial screening examination, diagnostic evaluation, and treatment of cancer precursors or early cancers. Metrics that enable comparisons across different screening targets are needed. We present population-based screening metrics for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers for nine sites participating in the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium.

METHODS

We describe how selected metrics map to a trans-organ conceptual model of the screening process. For each cancer type, we calculated calendar year 2013 metrics for the screen-eligible target population (breast: ages 40-74 years; cervical: ages 21-64 years; colorectal: ages 50-75 years). Metrics for screening participation, timely diagnostic evaluation, and diagnosed cancers in the screened and total populations are presented for the total eligible population and stratified by age group and cancer type.

RESULTS

The overall screening-eligible populations in 2013 were 305 568 participants for breast, 3 160 128 for cervical, and 2 363 922 for colorectal cancer screening. Being up-to-date for testing was common for all three cancer types: breast (63.5%), cervical (84.6%), and colorectal (77.5%). The percentage of abnormal screens ranged from 10.7% for breast, 4.4% for cervical, and 4.5% for colorectal cancer screening. Abnormal breast screens were followed up diagnostically in almost all (96.8%) cases, and cervical and colorectal were similar (76.2% and 76.3%, respectively). Cancer rates per 1000 screens were 5.66, 0.17, and 1.46 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Comprehensive assessment of metrics by the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens consortium enabled systematic identification of screening process steps in need of improvement. We encourage widespread use of common metrics to allow interventions to be tested across cancer types and health-care settings.

Mailed fecal immunochemical test outreach for colorectal cancer screening: Summary of a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored Summit

Uptake of colorectal cancer screening remains suboptimal. Mailed fecal immunochemical testing (FIT) offers promise for increasing screening rates, but optimal strategies for implementation have not been well synthesized. In June 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened a meeting of subject matter experts and stakeholders to answer key questions regarding mailed FIT implementation in the United States. Points of agreement included: 1) primers, such as texts, telephone calls, and printed mailings before mailed FIT, appear to contribute to effectiveness; 2) invitation letters should be brief and easy to read, and the signatory should be tailored based on setting; 3) instructions for FIT completion should be simple and address challenges that may lead to failed laboratory processing, such as notation of collection date; 4) reminders delivered to initial noncompleters should be used to increase the FIT return rate; 5) data infrastructure should identify eligible patients and track each step in the outreach process, from primer delivery through abnormal FIT follow-up; 6) protocols and procedures such as navigation should be in place to promote colonoscopy after abnormal FIT; 7) a high-quality, 1-sample FIT should be used; 8) sustainability requires a program champion and organizational support for the work, including sufficient funding and external policies (such as quality reporting requirements) to drive commitment to program investment; and 9) the cost effectiveness of mailed FIT has been established. Participants concluded that mailed FIT is an effective and efficient strategy with great potential for increasing colorectal cancer screening in diverse health care settings if more widely implemented.

Prospective Cohort study of Predictors of Follow-Up Diagnostic Colonoscopy from a Pragmatic Trial of FIT Screening

The goal of this study was to explore diagnostic colonoscopy completion in adults with abnormal screening fecal immunochemical test (FIT) results. This was a secondary analysis of the Strategies and Opportunities to Stop Colon Cancer in Priority Populations (Stop CRC) study, a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial to increase uptake of CRC screening in federally qualified community health clinics. Diagnostic colonoscopy completion and reasons for non-completion were ascertained through a manual review of electronic health records, and completion was compared across a wide range of individual patient health and sociodemographic characteristics. Among 2,018 adults with an abnormal FIT result, 1066 (52.8%) completed a follow-up colonoscopy within 12 months. Completion was generally similar across a wide range of participant subpopulations; however, completion was higher for participants who were younger, Hispanic, Spanish-speaking, and had zero or one of the Charlson medical comorbidities, compared to their counterparts. Neighborhood-level predictors were not associated with diagnostic colonoscopy completion. Thus, completion of a diagnostic colonoscopy was relatively low in a large sample of community health clinic adults who had an abnormal screening FIT result. While completion was generally similar across a wide range of characteristics, younger, healthier, Hispanic participants tended to have a higher likelihood of completion.

Causes of Socioeconomic Disparities in Colorectal Cancer and Intervention Framework and Strategies

Colorectal cancer (CRC) disproportionately affects people from low socioeconomic backgrounds and some racial minorities. Disparities in CRC incidence and outcomes might result from differences in exposure to risk factors such as unhealthy diet and sedentary lifestyle; limited access to risk-reducing behaviors such as chemoprevention, screening, and follow-up of abnormal test results; or lack of access to high-quality treatment resources. These factors operate at the individual, provider, health system, community, and policy levels to perpetuate CRC disparities. However, CRC disparities can be eliminated. Addressing the complex factors that contribute to development and progression of CRC with multicomponent, adaptive interventions, at multiple levels of the care continuum, can reduce gaps in mortality. These might be addressed with a combination of health care and community-based interventions and policy changes that promote healthy behaviors and ensure access to high-quality and effective measures for CRC prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. Improving resources and coordinating efforts in communities where people of low socioeconomic status live and work would increase access to evidence-based interventions. Research is also needed to understand the role and potential mechanisms by which factors in diet, intestinal microbiome, and/or inflammation contribute to differences in colorectal carcinogenesis. Studies of large cohorts with diverse populations are needed to identify epidemiologic and molecular factors that contribute to CRC development in different populations.

Breast Cancer Screening and Care Among Black Sexual Minority Women: A Scoping Review of the Literature from 1990 to 2017

Introduction: Black women are more likely to be diagnosed at later stages of breast cancer compared with White women due to lower frequency of screening and lack of timely follow-up after abnormal screening results. Disparities in breast cancer screening, risk, and mortality are present within both Black women and sexual minority communities; however, there exists limited research concerning breast cancer care among Black sexual minority women. Materials and Methods: This scoping review examines the literature from 1990 to 2017 of the breast cancer care continuum among Black sexual minority women, including behavioral risk factors, screening, treatment, and survivorship. A total of 91 articles were identified through PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases. Fifteen articles were selected for data extraction, which met the criteria for including Black/African American women, discussing breast cancer care among both racial and sexual minorities, and being a peer-reviewed article. Results: The 15 articles were primarily within urban contexts, and defined sexual minorities as lesbian or bisexual women. Across all the studies, Black sexual minority women were highly under-represented, and key conclusions are not fully applicable to Black sexual minority women. Sexual minority women had a higher prevalence of breast cancer risk factors (i.e., nulliparity, fewer mammograms, higher alcohol intake, and lower oral contraceptive use). Furthermore, some studies noted homophobia from health providers as potential barriers to engagement in care for sexual minority women. Conclusions: The lack of studies concerning Black sexual minority women in breast cancer care indicates the invisibility of a group that experiences multiple marginalized identities. More research is needed to capture the dynamics of the breast cancer care continuum for Black sexual minority women.

Diagnostic colonoscopy completion after abnormal fecal immunochemical testing and quality of tests used at 8 Federally Qualified Health Centers in Southern California: Opportunities for improving screening outcomes

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) of stool blood depends on high rates of colonoscopy follow-up for abnormal FITs and the use of high-quality tests. This study characterized colonoscopy referral and completion among patients with abnormal FITs and the types of FITs implemented in a sample of Southern California Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs).

METHODS

FQHCs in San Diego, Imperial, and Los Angeles Counties were invited to define a cohort of ≥150 consecutive patients with abnormal FITs in 2015-2016 and to provide data on sex, insurance status, diagnostic colonoscopy referrals and completion within 6 months of abnormal FITs, and the types (brands) of FITs implemented. The primary outcomes were the proportions with colonoscopy referrals and completion for all patients at each FQHC and in aggregate.

RESULTS

Eight FQHCs provided data for 1229 patients with abnormal FITs; 46% were male, and 20% were uninsured. Among patients with abnormal FITs, 89% (1091 of 1229; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.91) had a colonoscopy referral, and 44% (539 of 1229; 95% CI, 0.41-0.47) had colonoscopy completion. Across FQHCs, the range for colonoscopy referral was 73% to 96%, and the range for completion was 18% to 57%. Six of the 8 FQHCs (75%) reported FIT brands with limited data to support their effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

In a sample of Southern California FQHCs, diagnostic colonoscopy completion after abnormal FITs was substantially below the nationally recommended benchmark to achieve 80% completion, and the use of FIT brands with limited data to support their effectiveness was high. These findings suggest a need for policies and multilevel interventions to promote diagnostic colonoscopy among individuals with abnormal FITs and the use of higher quality FITs.

Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening: Patterns Among Women With Medicaid and Commercial Insurance

INTRODUCTION

Despite healthcare reforms mandating expanded insurance coverage and reduced out-of-pocket costs for preventive care, cancer screening rates remain relatively static. No study has measured cancer screening rates for multiple tests among non-Medicare patients.

METHODS

This retrospective, population-based claims analysis, conducted in 2016-2017, of commercially insured and Medicaid-insured women aged 30-59 years enrolled in IBM MarketScan Commercial and Medicaid Databases (containing approximately 90 and 17 million enrollees, respectively) during 2010-2015 describes screening rates for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer. Key outcomes were (1) proportion screened for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer among the age-eligible population compared with accepted age-based recommendations and (2) proportion with longer-than-recommended intervals between tests.

RESULTS

One half (54.7%) of commercially insured women aged 40-59 years (n=1,538,444) were screened three or more times during the 6-year study period for breast cancer; for Medicaid-insured women (n=78,897), the rates were lower (23.7%). One third (43.4%) of commercially insured and two thirds (68.9%) of Medicaid-insured women had a >2.5-year gap between mammograms. Among women aged 30-59 years, 59.3% of commercially insured women and 31.4% of Medicaid-insured women received two or more Pap tests. The proportion of patients with a >3.5-year gap between Pap tests was 33.9% (commercially insured) and 57.1% (Medicaid-insured). Among women aged 50-59 years, 63.3% of commercially insured women and 47.2% of Medicaid-insured women were screened at least one time for colorectal cancer. Almost all women aged 30-59 years (commercially insured, 99.1%; Medicaid-insured, 98.9%) had at least one healthcare encounter.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast and cervical cancer screenings remain underutilized among both commercially insured and Medicaid-insured populations, with lower rates among the Medicaid-insured population. However, almost all women had at least one healthcare encounter, suggesting opportunities for better coordinated care.

Barriers to Follow-up Colonoscopies for Patients With Positive Results From Fecal Immunochemical Tests During Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Colorectal cancer is common yet largely preventable. The fecal immunochemical test (FIT) is a highly recommended screening method, but patients with positive results must receive a follow-up colonoscopy to determine if they have precancerous or cancerous lesions. We characterized colonoscopic follow-up evaluations and reasons for lack of follow-up in a Veterans Affairs (VA) cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of patients 50 to 75 years old with a positive FIT result from January 1, 2014, through May 31, 2016, in a network of 12 VAs sites in southern California. We determined the proportion of patients who received a follow-up colonoscopy, median time to colonoscopy, and colonoscopy findings. For patients who did not undergo colonoscopy, we determined the documented reason for lack of colonoscopy and factors associated with declining the colonoscopy examination.

RESULTS

Of the 10,635 FITs performed, 916 (8.6%) produced positive results; 569 of these (62.1%) were followed by colonoscopy. The median time to colonoscopy after a positive FIT result was 83 days (interquartile range, 54-145 d), which did not vary between veterans who received a colonoscopy at a VA facility (81 d; interquartile range, 52-143 d) vs a non-VA site (87 d; interquartile range, 60-154 d) (P = .2). For the 347 veterans (37.9%) who did not undergo follow-up colonoscopy, the reasons were patient-related (49.3%), provider-related (16.4%), system-related (12.1%), or multifactorial (22.2%). Overall, patient decline of colonoscopy (35.2%) was the most common reason.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of veterans with positive results from FITs during CRC screening, reasons for lack of follow-up colonoscopy varied and included patient, provider, and system factors. These findings can be used to reduce barriers to follow-up colonoscopy and to address system-level challenges in scheduling and attrition for colonoscopy.

A blueprint for cancer screening and early detection: Advancing screening's contribution to cancer control

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.

Communication Practices of Mammography Facilities and Timely Follow-up of a Screening Mammogram with a BI-RADS 0 Assessment

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the association of communication practices with timely follow-up of screening mammograms read as Breast Imaging Reporting and Data Systems (BI-RADS) 0 in the Population-based Research Optimizing Screening through Personalized Regimens (PROSPR) consortium.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A radiology facility survey was conducted in 2015 with responses linked to screening mammograms obtained in 2011-2014. We considered timely follow-up to be within 15 days of the screening mammogram. Generalized estimating equation models were used to evaluate the association between modes of communication with patients and providers and timely follow-up, adjusting for PROSPR site, patient age, and race and ethnicity.

RESULTS

The analysis included 34,680 mammography examinations with a BI-RADS 0 assessment among 28 facilities. Across facilities, 85.6% of examinations had a follow-up within 15 days. Patients in a facility where routine practice was to contact the patient by phone if follow-up imaging was recommended were more likely to have timely follow-up (odds ratio [OR] 4.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.76-7.76), whereas standard use of mail was associated with reduced timely follow-up (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.75). Facilities that had standard use of electronic medical records to report the need for follow-up imaging to a provider had less timely follow-up (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90). Facilities that routinely contacted patients by mail if they missed a follow-up imaging visit were more likely to have timely follow-up (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.02-2.69).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the value of telephone communication to patients in relation to timely follow-up. Future research is needed to evaluate the role of communication in completing the breast cancer screening episode.

Cancer care coordination: opportunities for healthcare delivery research

In this commentary, we discuss opportunities to explore issues related to care coordination at three points on the cancer care continuum: (1) screening, particularly coordinating follow-up for abnormal findings, (2) active treatment, particularly challenges for patients with multiple chronic conditions, and (3) survivorship, particularly issues related to facilitating shared care between oncology and primary care. For each point on the continuum, we briefly summarize some of the important coordination issues and discuss potential avenues for future research in the context of existing evidence.

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.

Interventions to Improve Follow-up of Positive Results on Fecal Blood Tests: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Fecal immunochemical testing is the most commonly used method for colorectal cancer screening worldwide. However, its effectiveness is frequently undermined by failure to obtain follow-up colonoscopy after positive test results.

PURPOSE

To evaluate interventions to improve rates of follow-up colonoscopy for adults after a positive result on a fecal test (guaiac or immunochemical).

DATA SOURCES

English-language studies from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Embase from database inception through June 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized and nonrandomized studies reporting an intervention for colonoscopy follow-up of asymptomatic adults with positive fecal test results.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently extracted data and ranked study quality; 2 rated overall strength of evidence for each category of study type.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-three studies were eligible for analysis, including 7 randomized and 16 nonrandomized studies. Three were at low risk of bias. Eleven studies described patient-level interventions (changes to invitation, provision of results or follow-up appointments, and patient navigators), 5 provider-level interventions (reminders or performance data), and 7 system-level interventions (automated referral, precolonoscopy telephone calls, patient registries, and quality improvement efforts). Moderate evidence supported patient navigators and provider reminders or performance data. Evidence for system-level interventions was low. Seventeen studies reported the proportion of test-positive patients who completed colonoscopy compared with a control population, with absolute differences of -7.4 percentage points (95% CI, -19 to 4.3 percentage points) to 25 percentage points (CI, 14 to 35 percentage points).

LIMITATION

More than half of studies were at high or very high risk of bias; heterogeneous study designs and characteristics precluded meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Patient navigators and giving providers reminders or performance data may help improve colonoscopy rates of asymptomatic adults with positive fecal blood test results. Current evidence about useful system-level interventions is scant and insufficient.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

National Cancer Institute. (PROSPERO: CRD42016048286).

Racial/ethnic differences in obesity and comorbidities between safety-net- and non safety-net integrated health systems

Previous research shows that patients in integrated health systems experience fewer racial disparities compared with more traditional healthcare systems. Little is known about patterns of racial/ethnic disparities between safety-net and non safety-net integrated health systems.We evaluated racial/ethnic differences in body mass index (BMI) and the Charlson comorbidity index from 3 non safety-net- and 1 safety-net integrated health systems in a cross-sectional study. Multinomial logistic regression modeled comorbidity and BMI on race/ethnicity and health care system type adjusting for age, sex, insurance, and zip-code-level incomeThe study included 1.38 million patients. Higher proportions of safety-net versus non safety-net patients had comorbidity score of 3+ (11.1% vs. 5.0%) and BMI ≥35 (27.7% vs. 15.8%). In both types of systems, blacks and Hispanics were more likely than whites to have higher BMIs. Whites were more likely than blacks or Hispanics to have higher comorbidity scores in a safety net system, but less likely to have higher scores in the non safety-nets. The odds of comorbidity score 3+ and BMI 35+ in blacks relative to whites were significantly lower in safety-net than in non safety-net settings.Racial/ethnic differences were present within both safety-net and non safety-net integrated health systems, but patterns differed. Understanding patterns of racial/ethnic differences in health outcomes in safety-net and non safety-net integrated health systems is important to tailor interventions to eliminate racial/ethnic disparities in health and health care.