Decision making in cancer primary prevention and chemoprevention

Long-term aspirin use for primary cancer prevention: An updated systematic review and subgroup meta-analysis of 29 randomized clinical trials

Background and objective: Long-term aspirin use for the primary prevention of cancer remains controversial, and variations in the effect of aspirin use on cancer outcomes by aspirin dose, follow-up duration, or study population have never been systematically evaluated. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of aspirin on primary cancer prevention and to determine whether the effect differed according to aspirin dose, follow-up duration, or study population.

Materials and methods: Seven electronic databases were searched from inception to September 30, 2019. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared aspirin use versus no aspirin use in participants without pre-existing cancer and reported cancer outcomes were selected. Data were screened and extracted by different investigators. Analyses were performed using Review Manager 5.3 and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis 2.0. Total cancer incidence was defined as the primary clinical endpoint. Total cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, major bleeding, and total bleeding events were the secondary outcomes. Subgroup analyses were conducted based on aspirin dose, follow-up duration, and study populations.

Results: Twenty-nine RCTs that randomized 200,679 participants were included. Compared with no aspirin, aspirin use was not associated with significant reductions in total cancer incidence (RR = 1.01, 95% CI: 0.97 to 1.04, P = 0.72), total cancer mortality (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.07, P = 0.90), or all-cause mortality (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.02, P =0.31); however, aspirin use was associated with a 44% increase in the risk of major bleeding (RR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.32 to 1.57, P < 0.00001) and a 52% increase in the risk of total bleeding events (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.33 to 1.74, P < 0.00001). Subgroup analyses demonstrated consistent results.

Conclusions: Long-term aspirin use in individuals without pre-existing cancer was not associated with a significant reduction in total cancer incidence, cancer mortality, or all-cause mortality; however, aspirin use was associated with a significant increase in the risk of bleeding. Therefore, aspirin is not an appropriate choice for the primary cancer prevention.

Understanding Decision Making about Breast Cancer Prevention in Action: The Intersection of Perceived Risk, Perceived Control, and Social Context: NRG Oncology/NSABP DMP-1

BACKGROUND

Literature on decision making about breast cancer prevention focuses on individual perceptions and attitudes that predict chemoprevention use, rather than the process by which women decide whether to take risk-reducing medications. This secondary analysis aimed to understand how women's perceptions of breast cancer risk and locus of control influence their decision making.

METHODS

Women were accrued as part of the NRG Oncology/National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Decision-Making Project 1, a study aimed at understanding contributors to chemoprevention uptake. Thirty women participated in qualitative in-depth interviews after being counseled about chemoprevention. Deductive codes grouped women based on dimensions of risk perception and locus of control. We used a constant comparative method to make connections among inductive themes focused on decision making, deductive codes for perceived risk and perceived locus of control, and the influence of explanatory models within and across participants.

RESULTS

Participants were predominantly non-Hispanic white (63%), with an average age of 50.9 years. Decision making varied across groups: the high-perceived risk/high-perceived control group used "social evidence" to model the behaviors of others. High-perceived risk/low-perceived control women made decisions based on beliefs about treatment, rooted in the experiences of social contacts. The low-perceived risk/low-perceived control group interpreted signs of risk as part of the normal continuum of bodily changes in comparison to others. Low-perceived risk/high-perceived control women focused on maintaining a current healthy trajectory.

CONCLUSION

"Social evidence" plays an important role in the decision-making process that is distinct from emotional aspects. Attending to patients' perceptions of risk and control in conjunction with social context is key to caring for patients at high risk in a way that is evidence based and sensitive to patient preferences.

Women's perceptions of the adoption of personalised risk-based breast cancer screening and primary prevention: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Increased knowledge of breast cancer risk factors may enable a paradigm shift from the current age-based mammographic screening programmes to a personalised risk-based approach. This would warrant a significant change in practice, yet the acceptability from a woman's perspective has never been systematically explored. In this systematic review, we inventoried and appraised studies of women's perceptions of risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention to identify factors associated with adopting this new paradigm.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase and PsycInfo to identify original articles in English containing perceptions of risk-based breast cancer screening and/or primary prevention of women with an average to above average risk of developing breast cancer. Qualitative data were systematically extracted and referenced against four theoretical models of preventative health behaviour adoption.

RESULTS

When considering the adoption of this novel screening and prevention programme, women carefully review their perceived susceptibility to breast cancer. Their decisions are based on a cost-benefit analysis of adopting lifestyle changes, chemoprevention, or prophylactic surgery, taking into account their perceived competence, individual autonomy, relatedness to others, and personal preference. The role of intent is limited when considering behavioural change.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing risk-based breast cancer screening and prevention will require a multifactorial approach. The transition from theory to practice can be supported by developing evidence-based shared decision aids and family-oriented (genetic) counselling programmes.

Are we ready for the challenge of implementing risk-based breast cancer screening and primary prevention?

BACKGROUND

Increased knowledge of breast cancer risk factors provides opportunities to shift from a one-size-fits-all screening programme to a personalised approach, where screening and prevention is based on a woman's risk of developing breast cancer. However, potential implementation of this new paradigm could present considerable challenges which the present review aims to explore.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases were searched to identify studies evaluating potential implications of the implementation of personalised risk-based screening and primary prevention for breast cancer. Identified themes were evaluated using thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 5699 unique publications, of which 59 were selected for inclusion. Significant changes in policy and practice are warranted. The organisation of breast cancer screening spans several healthcare delivery systems and clinical settings. Feasibility of implementation depends on how healthcare is funded and arranged, and potentially varies between countries. Piloting risk assessment and prevention counselling in primary care settings has highlighted implications relating to the need for extensive additional training on risk (communication) and prevention, impact on workflow, and professionals' personal discomfort breaching the topic with women. Additionally, gaps in risk estimation, psychological, ethical and legal consequences will need to be addressed.

CONCLUSION

The present review identified considerable unresolved issues and challenges. Potential implementation will require a more complex framework, in which a country's healthcare regulations, resources, and preferences related to screening and prevention services are taken into account. However, with the insights gained from the present overview, countries expecting to implement risk-based screening and prevention can start to inventory and address the issues that were identified.

Motivators and barriers of tamoxifen use as risk-reducing medication amongst women at increased breast cancer risk: a systematic literature review

Background

Selective estrogen receptor modulators, such as tamoxifen, reduce breast cancer risk by up to 50% in women at increased risk for breast cancer. Despite tamoxifen’s well-established efficacy, many studies show that most women are not taking up tamoxifen. This systematic literature review aimed to identify the motivators and barriers to tamoxifen use ‘s amongst high-risk women.

Methods

Using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Embase plus reviewing reference lists of relevant articles published between 1995 and 2016, 31 studies (published in 35 articles) were identified, which addressed high-risk women’s decisions about risk-reducing medication to prevent breast cancer and were peer-reviewed primary clinical studies.

Results

A range of factors were identified as motivators of, and barriers to, tamoxifen uptake including: perceived risk, breast-cancer-related anxiety, health professional recommendation, perceived drug effectiveness, concerns about side-effects, knowledge and access to information about side-effects, beliefs about the role of risk-reducing medication, provision of a biomarker, preference for other forms of breast cancer risk reduction, previous treatment experience, concerns about randomization in clinical trial protocols and finally altruism.

Conclusions

Results indicate that the decision for high-risk women regarding tamoxifen use or non-use as a risk-reducing medication is not straightforward. Support of women making this decision is essential and needs to encompass the full range of factors, both informational and psychological.

Decision making in the context of breast cancer chemoprevention: patient perceptions and the meaning of risk

Chemoprevention with selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) is considered one of the most promising risk reduction options to date in the United States. Tamoxifen and raloxifene are both approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for breast cancer risk reduction. However, despite endorsement from the American Society for Clinical Oncology and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, uptake remains low. Decision aids have been successful in improving women's understanding and knowledge about the risk-benefit trade-offs in decision making regarding SERMs. However, increased knowledge does not lead to increased uptake of chemoprevention for the purpose of reducing breast cancer risk; instead, women become more reluctant to take medication that is itself associated with risks. Reasons for this include a lack of awareness that SERMs are effective in reducing breast cancer risk, an unwillingness to increase the risk of other disease, reluctance to take a daily medication, and the perception of tamoxifen as a "cancer drug." In studies on hypothetical decision making in the context of chemoprevention women indicate greater willingness to take a SERM when they are determined to be at risk. These findings suggest a differential understanding of what risk means among the general public, health professionals, and researchers. Feeling at risk is related to bodily signs and symptoms and not to population-derived probabilities. Such differential understanding may in part explain women's perception of the low efficacy of SERMs and their decision making regarding SERM use.

Partnering against cancer today: a blueprint for coordinating efforts through communication science

One of the hallmarks of the communication revolution over the past decade has been its support for participation, whether that be in the active engagement of patients searching the Web for answers to vital health questions, or in the collective energies of self-organizing communities through social media. At the same time, some of the major obstacles to achieving a full and equitable reach of evidence-based cancer control knowledge have been traced back to discontinuities in communication either within clinical care or the broader public awareness system. Communication scientists from the National Cancer Institute, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Cancer Society joined forces in 2010 to investigate ways in which communication science can be used to improve coordination and enhance participation in cancer control for the nation. From 2010 to 2013, the three organizations worked together in 1) convening two meetings designed to assess the status of funded research in communication science, 2) completing a systematic review of literature published over the previous 10 years, and 3) authoring a blueprint for coordinated efforts using the implications of communication science. The blueprint consists of three major goals: first, to identify high-yield targets of opportunity using the health impact pyramid articulated by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director, Thomas Frieden; second, to leverage opportunities within the new communication environment, including the opportunities catalyzed by national efforts to create an infrastructure for evidence implementation through health information technology; and third, to assist in coordinating efforts across collaborative entities through participative media.

Caregivers who refuse preventive care for their children: the relationship between immunization and topical fluoride refusal

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine caregivers' refusal of preventive medical and dental care for children.

METHODS

Prevalence rates of topical fluoride refusal based on dental records and caregiver self-reports were estimated for children treated in 3 dental clinics in Washington State. A 60-item survey was administered to 1024 caregivers to evaluate the association between immunization and topical fluoride refusal. Modified Poisson regression models were used to estimate prevalence rate ratios (PRRs).

RESULTS

The prevalence of topical fluoride refusal was 4.9% according to dental records and 12.7% according to caregiver self-reports. The rate of immunization refusal was 27.4%. In the regression models, immunization refusal was significantly associated with topical fluoride refusal (dental record PRR = 1.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.32, 1.96; P < .001; caregiver self-report PRR = 6.20; 95% CI = 3.21, 11.98; P < .001). Caregivers younger than 35 years were significantly more likely than older caregivers to refuse both immunizations and topical fluoride (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Caregiver refusal of immunizations is associated with topical fluoride refusal. Future research should identify the behavioral and social factors related to caregiver refusal of preventive care with the goal of developing multidisciplinary strategies to help caregivers make optimal preventive care decisions for children.

Associations among family history of cancer, cancer screening and lifestyle behaviors: a population-based study

PURPOSE

Some cancers are largely preventable through modification of certain behavioral risk factors and preventive screening, even among those with a family history of cancer. This study examined the associations between (1) family cancer history and cancer screening, (2) family history and cancer preventive lifestyle behaviors, and (3) cancer screening and lifestyle behaviors.

METHODS

Data were from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey (n = 12,603). Outcomes included screening for breast cancer (BC) and colorectal cancer (CRC) and six cancer preventive lifestyle behaviors, based on World Cancer Research Fund recommendations. Multivariate logistic regression analyses, stratified by gender and race-ethnicity, examined associations. Predicted probabilities of cancer screening by family cancer history, race-ethnicity, and sex were computed.

RESULTS

Family history of site-specific cancer-CRC for men and women, and BC for women-was associated with higher probability of cancer screening for most groups, especially for CRC, but was largely unrelated to other lifestyle behaviors. In the few cases in which family history was significantly associated with lifestyle-for example, physical activity among White and Latino males, smoking among White and Asian females-individuals with a family history had lower odds of adherence to recommendations than those with no family history. Greater overall adherence to lifestyle recommendations was associated with higher odds of up-to-date CRC screening among White and Asian males, and lower odds among Asian females (no significant association with BC screening); this relationship did not vary by family cancer history.

CONCLUSION

The fact that family history of cancer is not associated with better lifestyle behaviors may reflect shared behavioral risks within families, or the lack of knowledge about how certain lifestyle behaviors impact personal cancer risk. Findings can inform interventions aimed at lifestyle behavioral modification for individuals at increased cancer risk due to family history.

A qualitative study of factors influencing the decision to have an elective amputation

BACKGROUND

Some patients with a functionally impaired lower limb choose to have an elective amputation, whereas others do not. Functional outcomes do not favor either type of treatment, making this a complex decision. The experiences of patients who have chosen elective amputation were analyzed to identify the key factors in this decision-making process.

METHODS

Patients from a tertiary care amputee clinic who had chosen to undergo elective amputation of a functionally impaired lower limb participated in the present study. A qualitative research design involved the use of one-on-one semi-structured interviews, which were audio recorded and transcribed. Narrative analysis was used by three researchers to provide triangulation. Recurrent key themes and patterns were described. Personal factors in the decision-making process were identified.

RESULTS

Factors that had the largest impact on the decision-making process were pain, function, and participation. Body image, self identity, and the opinions of others had little influence. Satisfaction with the surgical outcome was related to how closely the result matched the patient's expectations. Patients who were better informed prior to surgery had more realistic expectations about living with an amputation.

CONCLUSIONS

The severity of pain and the desire for improved function are strong drivers for patients deciding to undergo elective amputation of a functionally impaired lower extremity. While patients do not want others' opinions, information regarding life with an amputation helps to set realistic expectations regarding outcome.

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and cervical cancer: uptake and next steps

Infection with a high-risk type of the human papillomavirus (HPV) is a major contributing factor in the vast majority of cervical cancers. Dissemination of the HPV vaccine is critical in reducing the risk of the disease. This descriptive review of HPV vaccine uptake in papers published between 2006 and 2011 focuses on studies conducted in girls and young women. In the United States, rates of immunization as per the protocol for teens (age 13-17 years) range from 6% to 75% and those for young women (age 18-26 years) range from 4% to 79%, although the samples and data collection methods vary. The epidemiology of HPV, the mechanisms of action, protocols for vaccine immunization, rates of uptake, and barriers to vaccination at the policy, provider, and patient levels are reviewed. Various intervention techniques are described, and policy-level programs, such as legislation supporting mandates, subsidized public education, and cost-reduction initiatives, are also explored. Increased distribution of the HPV vaccine in school-based clinics, evidencebased scripts for provider counseling of young patients and their parents, concurrent immunizations to adolescents, prevention visits, greater patient education and outreach, and the dissemination of academic detailing can help to boost vaccine uptake, particularly in underresourced communities. Population-based surveillance is necessary for robust estimates of uptake over time. Additional research is needed to comprehensively examine socio-demographic, psychosocial, and sociocultural factors that predict vaccine uptake according to the protocol. Increased study of the vaccine's long-term effectiveness, in both males and females and among extended age groups, is warranted.

Preserving the self: the process of decision making about hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer risk reduction

Women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) gene mutations have up to an 88% lifetime risk of breast cancer and up to a 65% lifetime risk of ovarian cancer. Strategies to address these risks include cancer screening and risk-reducing surgery (i.e., mastectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy). We conducted a grounded theory study with 22 BRCA1/2 mutation-carrier women to understand how women make decisions about these risk-reducing strategies. Preserving the self was the overarching decision-making process evident in the participants' descriptions. This process was shaped by contextual conditions including the characteristics of health services, the nature of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer risk-reduction decisions, gendered roles, and the women's perceived proximity to cancer. The women engaged in five decision-making styles, and these were characterized by the use of specific decision-making approaches. These findings provide theoretical insights that could inform the provision of decisional support to BRCA1/2 carriers.

Exploring older women's approaches to cervical cancer screening

The purpose of this qualitative study (N = 98, 11 focus groups) is to investigate how low-income, African American and Hispanic older women make decisions about cervical cancer screening. Using the health belief model to guide content analysis of transcripts, we found that primary barriers to screening were; embarrassment with, fear of, and pain from the test, difficulty in accessing screening, stigma associated with Medicaid coverage, and prior negative experiences with cancer detection. Women experienced cues to screening from their own bodies, in symptoms, and relied on spiritual beliefs to support them in coping with their health problems. Enhanced understanding of these factors could increase uptake of cervical cancer screening among the unscreened and underscreened.

Factors influencing perceptions of breast cancer genetic counseling among women in an urban health care system

The study assessed perceptions of breast cancer genetic counseling. Focus groups were conducted with twenty women (ages < = 50 years) in a Midwestern, urban health system identified as at above average risk of developing hereditary breast cancer and referred for breast cancer genetic counseling following mammography. All participants associated the words "breast cancer" with fear. African American women who received breast cancer genetic counseling may have channeled their fear into increased vigilance related to breast health. African American women who did not receive breast cancer genetic counseling were most knowledgeable about it. In contrast, Caucasian women who did not receive it reported uncertainty about the role of genetic counseling and testing in assessing breast cancer risk, mistrust in medical professionals, and lack of trust in the accuracy of genetic tests. The results could be used to help develop interventions to improve informed decision-making regarding breast cancer genetic counseling.