PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-25 (1770331)

Clipboard (0)
None

Related Articles

1.  Screening Mammography for Women Aged 40 to 49 Years at Average Risk for Breast Cancer 
Executive Summary
Objective
The aim of this review was to determine the effectiveness of screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer.
Clinical Need
The effectiveness of screening mammography in women aged over 50 years has been established, yet the issue of screening in women aged 40 to 49 years is still unsettled. The Canadian Task Force of Preventive Services, which sets guidelines for screening mammography for all provinces, supports neither the inclusion nor the exclusion of this screening procedure for 40- to 49-year-old women from the periodic health examination. In addition to this, 2 separate reviews, one conducted in Quebec in 2005 and the other in Alberta in 2000, each concluded that there is an absence of convincing evidence on the effectiveness of screening mammography for women in this age group who are at average risk for breast cancer.
In the United States, there is disagreement among organizations on whether population-based mammography should begin at the age of 40 or 50 years. The National Institutes of Health, the American Association for Cancer Research, and the American Academy of Family Physicians recommend against screening women in their 40s, whereas the United States Preventive Services Task Force, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the American College of Radiology, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend screening mammograms for women aged 40 to 49 years. Furthermore, in comparing screening guidelines between Canada and the United States, it is also important to recognize that “standard care” within a socialized medical system such as Canada’s differs from that of the United States. The National Breast Screening Study (NBSS-1), a randomized screening trial conducted in multiple centres across Canada, has shown there is no benefit in mortality from breast cancer from annual mammograms in women randomized between the ages of 40 and 49, relative to standard care (i.e. physical exam and teaching of breast-self examination on entry to the study, with usual community care thereafter).
At present, organized screening programs in Canada systematically screen women starting at 50 years of age, although with a physician’s referral, a screening mammogram is an insured service in Ontario for women under 50 years of age.
International estimates of the epidemiology of breast cancer show that the incidence of breast cancer is increasing for all ages combined, whereas mortality is decreasing, though at a slower rate. These decreasing mortality rates may be attributed to screening and advances in breast cancer therapy over time. Decreases in mortality attributable to screening may be a result of the earlier detection and treatment of invasive cancers, in addition to the increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), of which certain subpathologies are less lethal. Evidence from the SEER cancer registry in the United States indicates that the age-adjusted incidence of DCIS has increased almost 10-fold over a 20-year period (from 2.7 to 25 per 100,000).
The incidence of breast cancer is lower in women aged 40 to 49 years than in women aged 50 to 69 years (about 140 per 100,000 versus 500 per 100,000 women, respectively), as is the sensitivity (about 75% versus 85% for women aged under and over 50, respectively) and specificity of mammography (about 80% versus 90% for women aged under and over 50, respectively). The increased density of breast tissue in younger women is mainly responsible for the lower accuracy of this procedure in this age group. In addition, as the proportion of breast cancers that occur before the age of 50 are more likely to be associated with genetic predisposition as compared with those diagnosed in women after the age of 50, mammography may not be an optimal screening method for younger women.
Treatment options vary with the stage of disease (based on tumor size, involvement of surrounding tissue, and number of affected axillary lymph nodes) and its pathology, and may include a combination of surgery, chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy.
Surgery is the first-line intervention for biopsy confirmed tumours. The subsequent use of radiation, chemotherapy, or hormonal treatments is dependent on the histopathologic characteristics of the tumor and the type of surgery. There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment of DCIS, which is noninvasive.
With such controversy as to the effectiveness of mammography and the potential risk associated with women being overtreated or actual cancers being missed, and the increased risk of breast cancer associated with exposure to annual mammograms over a 10-year period, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee requested this review of screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer. This review is the first of 2 parts and concentrates on the effectiveness of screening mammography (i.e., film mammography, FM) for women at average risk aged 40 to 49 years. The second part will be an evaluation of screening by either magnetic resonance imaging or digital mammography, with the objective of determining the optimal screening modality in these younger women.
Review Strategy
The following questions were asked:
Does screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years who are at average risk for breast cancer reduce breast cancer mortality?
What is the sensitivity and specificity of mammography for this age group?
What are the risks associated with annual screening from ages 40 to 49?
What are the risks associated with false positive and false negative mammography results?
What are the economic considerations if evidence for effectiveness is established?
The Medical Advisory Secretariat followed its standard procedures and searched these electronic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment.
Keywords used in the search were breast cancer, breast neoplasms, mass screening, and mammography.
In total, the search yielded 6,359 articles specific to breast cancer screening and mammography. This did not include reports on diagnostic mammograms. The search was further restricted to English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses published between 1995 and 2005. Excluded were case reports, comments, editorials, and letters, which narrowed the results to 516 articles and previous health technology policy assessments.
These were examined against the criteria outlined below. This resulted in the inclusion of 5 health technology assessments, the Canadian Preventive Services Task Force report, the United States Preventive Services Task Force report, 1 Cochrane review, and 8 RCTs.
Inclusion Criteria
English-language articles, and English and French-language health technology policy assessments, conducted by other organizations, from 1995 to 2005
Articles specific to RCTs of screening mammography of women at average risk for breast cancer that included results for women randomized to studies between the ages of 40 and 49 years
Studies in which women were randomized to screening with or without mammography, although women may have had clinical breast examinations and/or may have been conducting breast self-examination.
UK Age Trial results published in December 2006.
Exclusion Criteria
Observational studies, including those nested within RCTs
RCTs that do not include results on women between the ages of 40 and 49 at randomization
Studies in which mammography was compared with other radiologic screening modalities, for example, digital mammography, magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound.
Studies in which women randomized had a personal history of breast cancer.
Intervention
Film mammography
Comparators
Within RCTs, the comparison group would have been women randomized to not undergo screening mammography, although they may have had clinical breast examinations and/or have been conducting breast self-examination.
Outcomes of Interest
Breast cancer mortality
Summary of Findings
There is Level 1 Canadian evidence that screening women between the ages of 40 and 49 years who are at average risk for breast cancer is not effective, and that the absence of a benefit is sustained over a maximum follow-up period of 16 years.
All remaining studies that reported on women aged under 50 years were based on subset analyses. They provide additional evidence that, when all these RCTs are taken into account, there is no significant reduction in breast cancer mortality associated with screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years.
Conclusions
There is Level 1 evidence that screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer is not effective in reducing mortality.
Moreover, risks associated with exposure to mammographic radiation, the increased risk of missed cancers due to lower mammographic sensitivity, and the psychological impact of false positives, are not inconsequential.
The UK Age Trial results published in December 2006 did not change these conclusions.
PMCID: PMC3377515  PMID: 23074501
2.  Cancer Screening with Digital Mammography for Women at Average Risk for Breast Cancer, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) for Women at High Risk 
Executive Summary
Objective
The purpose of this review is to determine the effectiveness of 2 separate modalities, digital mammography (DM) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), relative to film mammography (FM), in the screening of women asymptomatic for breast cancer. A third analysis assesses the effectiveness and safety of the combination of MRI plus mammography (MRI plus FM) in screening of women at high risk. An economic analysis was also conducted.
Research Questions
How does the sensitivity and specificity of DM compare to FM?
How does the sensitivity and specificity of MRI compare to FM?
How do the recall rates compare among these screening modalities, and what effect might this have on radiation exposure? What are the risks associated with radiation exposure?
How does the sensitivity and specificity of the combination of MRI plus FM compare to either MRI or FM alone?
What are the economic considerations?
Clinical Need
The effectiveness of FM with respect to breast cancer mortality in the screening of asymptomatic average- risk women over the age of 50 has been established. However, based on a Medical Advisory Secretariat review completed in March 2006, screening is not recommended for women between the ages of 40 and 49 years. Guidelines published by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Care recommend mammography screening every 1 to 2 years for women aged 50 years and over, hence, the inclusion of such women in organized breast cancer screening programs. In addition to the uncertainty of the effectiveness of mammography screening from the age of 40 years, there is concern over the risks associated with mammographic screening for the 10 years between the ages of 40 and 49 years.
The lack of effectiveness of mammography screening starting at the age of 40 years (with respect to breast cancer mortality) is based on the assumption that the ability to detect cancer decreases with increased breast tissue density. As breast density is highest in the premenopausal years (approximately 23% of postmenopausal and 53% of premenopausal women having at least 50% of the breast occupied by high density), mammography screening is not promoted in Canada nor in many other countries for women under the age of 50 at average risk for breast cancer. It is important to note, however, that screening of premenopausal women (i.e., younger than 50 years of age) at high risk for breast cancer by virtue of a family history of cancer or a known genetic predisposition (e.g., having tested positive for the breast cancer genes BRCA1 and/or BRCA2) is appropriate. Thus, this review will assess the effectiveness of breast cancer screening with modalities other than film mammography, specifically DM and MRI, for both pre/perimenopausal and postmenopausal age groups.
International estimates of the epidemiology of breast cancer show that the incidence of breast cancer is increasing for all ages combined whereas mortality is decreasing, though at a slower rate. The observed decreases in mortality rates may be attributable to screening, in addition to advances in breast cancer therapy over time. Decreases in mortality attributable to screening may be a result of the earlier detection and treatment of invasive cancers, in addition to the increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), of which certain subpathologies are less lethal. Evidence from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (better known as SEER) cancer registry in the United States, indicates that the age-adjusted incidence of DCIS has increased almost 10-fold over a 20 year period, from 2.7 to 25 per 100,000.
There is a 4-fold lower incidence of breast cancer in the 40 to 49 year age group than in the 50 to 69 year age group (approximately 140 per 100,000 versus 500 per 100,000 women, respectively). The sensitivity of FM is also lower among younger women (approximately 75%) than for women aged over 50 years (approximately 85%). Specificity is approximately 80% for younger women versus 90% for women over 50 years. The increased density of breast tissue in younger women is likely responsible for the decreased accuracy of FM.
Treatment options for breast cancer vary with the stage of disease (based on tumor size, involvement of surrounding tissue, and number of affected axillary lymph nodes) and its pathology, and may include a combination of surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. Surgery is the first-line intervention for biopsy-confirmed tumors. The subsequent use of radiation, chemotherapy or hormonal treatments is dependent on the histopathologic characteristics of the tumor and the type of surgery. There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment of DCIS, which is considered a noninvasive tumour.
Women at high risk for breast cancer are defined as genetic carriers of the more commonly known breast cancer genes (BRCA1, BRCA2 TP53), first degree relatives of carriers, women with varying degrees of high risk family histories, and/or women with greater than 20% lifetime risk for breast cancer based on existing risk models. Genetic carriers for this disease, primarily women with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations, have a lifetime probability of approximately 85% of developing breast cancer. Preventive options for these women include surgical interventions such as prophylactic mastectomy and/or oophorectomy, i.e., removal of the breasts and/or ovaries. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the benefits and risks of different screening modalities, to identify additional options for these women.
This Medical Advisory Secretariat review is the second of 2 parts on breast cancer screening, and concentrates on the evaluation of both DM and MRI relative to FM, the standard of care. Part I of this review (March 2006) addressed the effectiveness of screening mammography in 40 to 49 year old average-risk women. The overall objective of the present review is to determine the optimal screening modality based on the evidence.
Evidence Review Strategy
The Medical Advisory Secretariat followed its standard procedures and searched the following electronic databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment database. The subject headings and keywords searched included breast cancer, breast neoplasms, mass screening, digital mammography, magnetic resonance imaging. The detailed search strategies can be viewed in Appendix 1.
Included in this review are articles specific to screening and do not include evidence on diagnostic mammography. The search was further restricted to English-language articles published between January 1996 and April 2006. Excluded were case reports, comments, editorials, nonsystematic reviews, and letters.
Digital Mammography: In total, 224 articles specific to DM screening were identified. These were examined against the inclusion/exclusion criteria described below, resulting in the selection and review of 5 health technology assessments (HTAs) (plus 1 update) and 4 articles specific to screening with DM.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging: In total, 193 articles specific to MRI were identified. These were examined against the inclusion/exclusion criteria described below, resulting in the selection and review of 2 HTAs and 7 articles specific to screening with MRI.
The evaluation of the addition of FM to MRI in the screening of women at high risk for breast cancer was also conducted within the context of standard search procedures of the Medical Advisory Secretariat. as outlined above. The subject headings and keywords searched included the concepts of breast cancer, magnetic resonance imaging, mass screening, and high risk/predisposition to breast cancer. The search was further restricted to English-language articles published between September 2007 and January 15, 2010. Case reports, comments, editorials, nonsystematic reviews, and letters were not excluded.
MRI plus mammography: In total, 243 articles specific to MRI plus FM screening were identified. These were examined against the inclusion/exclusion criteria described below, resulting in the selection and review of 2 previous HTAs, and 1 systematic review of 11 paired design studies.
Inclusion Criteria
English-language articles, and English or French-language HTAs published from January 1996 to April 2006, inclusive.
Articles specific to screening of women with no personal history of breast cancer.
Studies in which DM or MRI were compared with FM, and where the specific outcomes of interest were reported.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or paired studies only for assessment of DM.
Prospective, paired studies only for assessment of MRI.
Exclusion Criteria
Studies in which outcomes were not specific to those of interest in this report.
Studies in which women had been previously diagnosed with breast cancer.
Studies in which the intervention (DM or MRI) was not compared with FM.
Studies assessing DM with a sample size of less than 500.
Intervention
Digital mammography.
Magnetic resonance imaging.
Comparator
Screening with film mammography.
Outcomes of Interest
Breast cancer mortality (although no studies were found with such long follow-up).
Sensitivity.
Specificity.
Recall rates.
Summary of Findings
Digital Mammography
There is moderate quality evidence that DM is significantly more sensitive than FM in the screening of asymptomatic women aged less than 50 years, those who are premenopausal or perimenopausal, and those with heterogeneously or extremely dense breast tissue (regardless of age).
It is not known what effect these differences in sensitivity will have on the more important effectiveness outcome measure of breast cancer mortality, as there was no evidence of such an assessment.
Other factors have been set out to promote DM, for example, issues of recall rates and reading and examination times. Our analysis did not show that recall rates were necessarily improved in DM, though examination times were lower than for FM. Other factors including storage and retrieval of screens were not the subject of this analysis.
Magnetic Resonance Imaging
There is moderate quality evidence that the sensitivity of MRI is significantly higher than that of FM in the screening of women at high risk for breast cancer based on genetic or familial factors, regardless of age.
Radiation Risk Review
Cancer Care Ontario conducted a review of the evidence on radiation risk in screening with mammography women at high risk for breast cancer. From this review of recent literature and risk assessment that considered the potential impact of screening mammography in cohorts of women who start screening at an earlier age or who are at increased risk of developing breast cancer due to genetic susceptibility, the following conclusions can be drawn:
For women over 50 years of age, the benefits of mammography greatly outweigh the risk of radiation-induced breast cancer irrespective of the level of a woman’s inherent breast cancer risk.
Annual mammography for women aged 30 – 39 years who carry a breast cancer susceptibility gene or who have a strong family breast cancer history (defined as a first degree relative diagnosed in their thirties) has a favourable benefit:risk ratio. Mammography is estimated to detect 16 to 18 breast cancer cases for every one induced by radiation (Table 1). Initiation of screening at age 35 for this same group would increase the benefit:risk ratio to an even more favourable level of 34-50 cases detected for each one potentially induced.
Mammography for women under 30 years of age has an unfavourable benefit:risk ratio due to the challenges of detecting cancer in younger breasts, the aggressiveness of cancers at this age, the potential for radiation susceptibility at younger ages and a greater cumulative radiation exposure.
Mammography when used in combination with MRI for women who carry a strong breast cancer susceptibility (e.g., BRCA1/2 carriers), which if begun at age 35 and continued for 35 years, may confer greatly improved benefit:risk ratios which were estimated to be about 220 to one.
While there is considerable uncertainty in the risk of radiation-induced breast cancer, the risk expressed in published studies is almost certainly conservative as the radiation dose absorbed by women receiving mammography recently has been substantially reduced by newer technology.
A CCO update of the mammography radiation risk literature for 2008 and 2009 gave rise to one article by Barrington de Gonzales et al. published in 2009 (Barrington de Gonzales et al., 2009, JNCI, vol. 101: 205-209). This article focuses on estimating the risk of radiation-induced breast cancer for mammographic screening of young women at high risk for breast cancer (with BRCA gene mutations). Based on an assumption of a 15% to 25% or less reduction in mortality from mammography in these high risk women, the authors conclude that such a reduction is not substantially greater than the risk of radiation-induced breast cancer mortality when screening before the age of 34 years. That is, there would be no net benefit from annual mammographic screening of BRCA mutation carriers at ages 25-29 years; the net benefit would be zero or small if screening occurs in 30-34 year olds, and there would be some net benefit at age 35 years or older.
The Addition of Mammography to Magnetic Resonance Imaging
The effects of the addition of FM to MRI screening of high risk women was also assessed, with inclusion and exclusion criteria as follows:
Inclusion Criteria
English-language articles and English or French-language HTAs published from September 2007 to January 15, 2010.
Articles specific to screening of women at high risk for breast cancer, regardless of the definition of high risk.
Studies in which accuracy data for the combination of MRI plus FM are available to be compared to that of MRI and FM alone.
RCTs or prospective, paired studies only.
Studies in which women were previously diagnosed with breast cancer were also included.
Exclusion Criteria
Studies in which outcomes were not specific to those of interest in this report.
Studies in which there was insufficient data on the accuracy of MRI plus FM.
Intervention
Both MRI and FM.
Comparators
Screening with MRI alone and FM alone.
Outcomes of Interest
Sensitivity.
Specificity.
Summary of Findings
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Plus Mammography
Moderate GRADE Level Evidence that the sensitivity of MRI plus mammography is significantly higher than that of MRI or FM alone, although the specificity remains either unchanged or decreases in the screening of women at high risk for breast cancer based on genetic/familial factors, regardless of age.
These studies include women at high risk defined as BRCA1/2 or TP53 carriers, first degree relatives of carriers, women with varying degrees of high risk family histories, and/or >20% lifetime risk based on existing risk models. This definition of high risk accounts for approximately 2% of the female adult population in Ontario.
PMCID: PMC3377503  PMID: 23074406
3.  Pathways of Breast Cancer Screening Among Chinese American Women 
Objective
The purpose of this community-based study was to develop a structural equation model for factors contributing to breast cancer screening among Chinese American women.
Methods
A cross-sectional design included a sample of 440 Chinese American women aged 40 years and older. The initial step involved use of confirmatory factor analysis, which included the following variables: access/satisfaction with health care, enabling, predisposing, and cultural and health belief factors. Structural equation model analyses were conducted to evaluate factors related to breast cancer screening in Chinese American women.
Results
Initial univariate analyses indicated that women without health insurance were significantly more likely to report being never-screened compared to women with health insurance. Structural equation modeling techniques were used to evaluate the utility of the Sociocultural Health Behavior model in understanding breast cancer screening among Chinese American women. Results indicated that enabling and predisposing factors were significantly and positively related to breast cancer screening. Cultural factors were significantly associated with enabling factors and satisfaction with healthcare. Overall, the proposed model explained 34% of the variance in breast cancer screening among Chinese American women.
Conclusions
The model highlights the significance of enabling and predisposing factors in understanding breast cancer screening behaviors among Chinese American women. In addition, cultural factors were associated with enabling factors, reinforcing the importance of providing translation assistance to Chinese women with poor English fluency and increasing awareness of the critical role of breast cancer screening. Partnering with community organizations may help to facilitate and enhance the screening rates.
doi:10.4172/2161-0711.1000209
PMCID: PMC3762685  PMID: 24013711
Mammograms; Breast cancer screening; Chinese women
4.  A systematic review of interventions to increase breast and cervical cancer screening uptake among Asian women 
BMC Public Health  2012;12:413.
Background
The Asian population is one of the fastest growing ethnic minority groups in western countries. However, cancer screening uptake is consistently lower in this group than in the native-born populations. As a first step towards developing an effective cancer screening intervention program targeting Asian women, we conducted a comprehensive systematic review, without geographic, language or date limitations, to update current knowledge on the effectiveness of existing intervention strategies to enhance breast and cervical screening uptake in Asian women.
Methods
This study systematically reviewed studies published as of January 2010 to synthesize knowledge about effectiveness of cancer screening interventions targeting Asian women. Fifteen multidisciplinary peer-reviewed and grey literature databases were searched to identify relevant studies.
Results
The results of our systematic review were reported in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. Of 37 selected intervention studies, only 18 studies included valid outcome measures (i.e. self-reported or recorded receipt of mammograms or Pap smear). 11 of the 18 intervention studies with valid outcome measures used multiple intervention strategies to target individuals in a specific Asian ethnic group. This observed pattern of intervention design supports the hypothesis that employing a combination of multiple strategies is more likely to be successful than single interventions. The effectiveness of community-based or workplace-based group education programs increases when additional supports, such as assistance in scheduling/attending screening and mobile screening services are provided. Combining cultural awareness training for health care professionals with outreach workers who can help healthcare professionals overcome language and cultural barriers is likely to improve cancer screening uptake. Media campaigns and mailed culturally sensitive print materials alone may be ineffective in increasing screening uptake. Intervention effectiveness appears to vary with ethnic population, methods of program delivery, and study setting.
Conclusions
Despite some limitations, our review has demonstrated that the effectiveness of existing interventions to promote breast and cervical cancer screening uptake in Asian women may hinge on a variety of factors, such as type of intervention and study population characteristics. While some studies demonstrated the effectiveness of certain intervention programs, the cost effectiveness and long-term sustainability of these programs remain questionable. When adopting an intervention program, it is important to consider the impacts of social-and cultural factors specific to the Asian population on cancer screening uptake. Future research is needed to develop new interventions and tools, and adopt vigorous study design and evaluation methodologies to increase cancer screening among Asian women to promote population health and health equity.
doi:10.1186/1471-2458-12-413
PMCID: PMC3488494  PMID: 22676147
5.  Breast cancer experience and survivorship among Asian Americans: A systematic review 
Introduction
Breast cancer is the most common cancer in Asian American women, and the number of Asian American breast cancer survivors is rapidly increasing. Although Asian Americans are one of the fastest growing and most heterogeneous ethnic groups in the United States, limited data exist in regard to their breast cancer experience and survivorship.
Methods
A systematic review of the breast cancer experience literature was conducted and included studies of Asian Americans or their subgroups as a major category of study participants. Of the 125 studies reviewed, 10 qualitative studies, 10 quantitative studies, 5 studies that used a mixed-method approach, and 1 intervention study met the criteria for inclusion.
Results
Qualitatively, Asian Americans reported unmet physical and emotional needs and challenges during survivorship. Quantitative studies consistently found that socioeconomic status, cultural health beliefs, immigration stress, acculturation level, English proficiency, social support, and spirituality influence Asian American breast cancer patients’ health behaviors and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Studies also revealed significant variation in breast cancer reaction and HRQOL within Asian American subgroups.
Conclusions
Although research on Asian American breast cancer experience and survivorship is sparse, we concluded that Asian Americans experience disrupted HRQOL following breast cancer diagnosis and treatment, interwoven with their cultural and socio-ecological system, and that programs focused on improving cancer survivorship outcomes among this ethnic minority group are limited. Most studies have concentrated on the West coast population, and there is significant underrepresentation of longitudinal and intervention studies. Implications for study design, measurement, and future research areas are also included.
Implications for Cancer Survivors
The results highlight a need to understand ethnic differences and to take into account social, cultural, and linguistic factors in breast cancer survivorship experiences among Asian American subgroups as a means to develop culturally relevant and linguistically appropriate interventions designed to improve HRQOL.
doi:10.1007/s11764-013-0320-8
PMCID: PMC3945715  PMID: 24214498
survivorship; breast cancer; Asian Americans; literature review
6.  Disparities in mammographic screening for Asian women in California: a cross-sectional analysis to identify meaningful groups for targeted intervention 
BMC Cancer  2007;7:201.
Background
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among the rapidly growing population of Asian Americans; it is also the most common cause of cancer mortality among Filipinas. Asian women continue to have lower rates of mammographic screening than women of most other racial/ethnic groups. While prior studies have described the effects of sociodemographic and other characteristics of women on non-adherence to screening guidelines, they have not identified the distinct segments of the population who remain at highest risk of not being screened.
Methods
To better describe characteristics of Asian women associated with not having a mammogram in the last two years, we applied recursive partitioning to population-based data (N = 1521) from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS), for seven racial/ethnic groups of interest: Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, South Asian, Vietnamese, and all Asians combined.
Results
We identified two major subgroups of Asian women who reported not having a mammogram in the past two years and therefore, did not follow mammography screening recommendations: 1) women who have never had a pap exam to screen for cervical cancer (68% had no mammogram), and 2) women who have had a pap exam, but have no women's health issues (osteoporosis, using menopausal hormone therapies, and/or hysterectomy) nor a usual source of care (62% had no mammogram). Only 19% of Asian women who have had pap screening and have women's health issues did not have a mammogram in the past two years. In virtually all ethnic subgroups, having had pap or colorectal screening were the strongest delineators of mammography usage. Other characteristics of women least likely to have had a mammogram included: Chinese non-U.S. citizens or citizens without usual source of health care, Filipinas with no health insurance, Koreans without women's health issues and public or no health insurance, South Asians less than age 50 who were unemployed or non-citizens, and Vietnamese women who were never married.
Conclusion
We identified distinct subgroups of Asian women at highest risk of not adhering to mammography screening guidelines; these data can inform outreach efforts aimed at reducing the disparity in mammography screening among Asian women.
doi:10.1186/1471-2407-7-201
PMCID: PMC2198916  PMID: 17961259
7.  Findings from Focus Groups Indicating what Chinese American immigrant women think about breast cancer and breast cancer screening 
Objectives
To explore beliefs of Chinese American, immigrant women related to breast cancer and mammography.
Design
Qualitative description with semi-structured focus groups.
Setting
Metropolitan Portland, Oregon.
Participants
Thirty eight foreign-born Chinese women, age 40 and older, in five focus groups.
Methods
Focus group discussions in Chinese were audio taped, transcribed, and translated into English. Using a process of directed content analysis, group transcripts were coded for themes based on the discussion guide.
Results
Three main themes emerged from the analysis: knowledge and beliefs; support, communication, and educational needs; and access to care. Subthemes included beliefs such as barriers and facilitators to screening and perceptions about personal breast cancer risk. Several women were profoundly affected by the negative breast cancer-related experiences of relatives and friends. Some common myths remain about causes and treatment of breast cancer.
Conclusions
Although Chinese American immigrant women share beliefs with other minority women in the United States, some culturally-related barriers such as alienation due to cultural reasons for not sharing diagnosis with anyone and beliefs about the efficacy of Eastern versus Western medicine may affect adherence to screening and treatment. Facilitators included being told to get the test and getting screened for the sake of the family, while erroneous information about the cause of breast cancer such as diet and stress remained. Primary care providers such as advanced practice nurses should take into account culturally driven motivations and barriers to mammography adherence among Chinese American immigrant women. Provider-client interactions should involve more discussion about women’s breast cancer risks and screening harms and benefits. Such awareness could open a dialogue around breast cancer that is culturally sensitive and non-threatening to the patient. Information may need to be tailored to women individually or targeted to sub-ethnic groups rather than using generic messages for all Asian immigrant women.
doi:10.1111/j.1552-6909.2012.01348.x
PMCID: PMC3410053  PMID: 22537294
Breast cancer; Chinese Immigrant women; Health beliefs; Focus groups
8.  Do cultural factors predict mammography behavior among Korean immigrants? 
Journal of advanced nursing  2009;65(12):2574-2584.
Aim
This paper is a report of a study of the correlates of mammogram use among Korean American women.
Background
Despite the increasing incidence of and mortality from breast cancer, Asian women in the United States of America report consistently low rates of mammography screening. A number of health beliefs and sociodemographic characteristics have been associated with mammogram participation among these women; however, studies systematically investigating cultural factors in relation to mammogram experience have been scarce.
Methods
We measured screening-related health beliefs, modesty and use of Eastern medicine in 100 Korean American women in 2006. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to examine the unique contribution of the study variables, after accounting for sociodemographic characteristics.
Findings
Only 51% reported past mammogram use. Korean American women who had previously had mammograms were statistically significantly older and had higher perceived benefit scores than those who had not. Perceived benefits (odds ratio=6.3, 95% confidence interval=2.12, 18.76) and breast cancer susceptibility (odds ratio=3.18, 95% confidence interval=1.06, 9.59) were statistically significant correlates of mammography experience, whereas cultural factors did not correlate. Post hoc analysis showed that for women with some or good English skills, cultural factors statistically significantly correlated with health beliefs and breast cancer knowledge (p < 0.05).
Conclusion
Nurses should consider the inclusion in culturally-tailored interventions of more targeted outreach and healthcare system navigation assistance for promoting mammography screening in Korean American women. Further research is needed to unravel the interplay between acculturation, cultural factors, and health beliefs related to cancer screening behaviors of Korean American women.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05155.x
PMCID: PMC2786070  PMID: 19941544
breast cancer; cultural factors; mammography; ethnicity; Women’s health; Immigrants; Korea
9.  Engaging diverse underserved communities to bridge the mammography divide 
BMC Public Health  2011;11:47.
Background
Breast cancer screening continues to be underutilized by the population in general, but is particularly underutilized by traditionally underserved minority populations. Two of the most at risk female minority groups are American Indians/Alaska Natives (AI/AN) and Latinas. American Indian women have the poorest recorded 5-year cancer survival rates of any ethnic group while breast cancer is the number one cause of cancer mortality among Latina women. Breast cancer screening rates for both minority groups are near or at the lowest among all racial/ethnic groups. As with other health screening behaviors, women may intend to get a mammogram but their intentions may not result in initiation or follow through of the examination process. An accumulating body of research, however, demonstrates the efficacy of developing 'implementation intentions' that define when, where, and how a specific behavior will be performed. The formulation of intended steps in addition to addressing potential barriers to test completion can increase a person's self-efficacy, operationalize and strengthen their intention to act, and close gaps between behavioral intention and completion. To date, an evaluation of the formulation of implementation intentions for breast cancer screening has not been conducted with minority populations.
Methods/Design
In the proposed program, community health workers will meet with rural-dwelling Latina and American Indian women one-on-one to educate them about breast cancer and screening and guide them through a computerized and culturally tailored "implementation intentions" program, called Healthy Living Kansas - Breast Health, to promote breast cancer screening utilization. We will target Latina and AI/AN women from two distinct rural Kansas communities. Women attending community events will be invited by CHWs to participate and be randomized to either a mammography "implementation intentions" (MI2) intervention or a comparison general breast cancer prevention informational intervention (C). CHWs will be armed with notebook computers loaded with our Healthy Living Kansas - Breast Health program and guide their peers through the program. Women in the MI2 condition will receive assistance with operationalizing their screening intentions and identifying and addressing their stated screening barriers with the goal of guiding them toward accessing screening services near their community. Outcomes will be evaluated at 120-days post randomization via self-report and will include mammography utilization status, barriers, and movement along a behavioral stages of readiness to screen model.
Discussion
This highly innovative project will be guided and initiated by AI/AN and Latina community members and will test the practical application of emerging behavioral theory among minority persons living in rural communities.
Trial Registration
ClinicalTrials (NCT): NCT01267110
doi:10.1186/1471-2458-11-47
PMCID: PMC3036625  PMID: 21255424
10.  Association between Melanocytic Nevi and Risk of Breast Diseases: The French E3N Prospective Cohort 
PLoS Medicine  2014;11(6):e1001660.
Using data from the French E3N prospective cohort, Marina Kvaskoff and colleagues examine the association between number of cutaneous nevi and the risk for breast cancer.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Background
While melanocytic nevi have been associated with genetic factors and childhood sun exposure, several observations also suggest a potential hormonal influence on nevi. To test the hypothesis that nevi are associated with breast tumor risk, we explored the relationships between number of nevi and benign and malignant breast disease risk.
Methods and Findings
We prospectively analyzed data from E3N, a cohort of French women aged 40–65 y at inclusion in 1990. Number of nevi was collected at inclusion. Hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. Associations of number of nevi with personal history of benign breast disease (BBD) and family history of breast cancer were estimated using logistic regression. Over the period 15 June 1990–15 June 2008, 5,956 incident breast cancer cases (including 5,245 invasive tumors) were ascertained among 89,902 women. In models adjusted for age, education, and known breast cancer risk factors, women with “very many” nevi had a significantly higher breast cancer risk (HR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.01–1.27 versus “none”; ptrend = 0.04), although significance was lost after adjustment for personal history of BBD or family history of breast cancer. The 10-y absolute risk of invasive breast cancer increased from 3,749 per 100,000 women without nevi to 4,124 (95% CI = 3,674–4,649) per 100,000 women with “very many” nevi. The association was restricted to premenopausal women (HR = 1.40, ptrend = 0.01), even after full adjustment (HR = 1.34, ptrend = 0.03; phomogeneity = 0.04), but did not differ according to breast cancer type or hormone receptor status. In addition, we observed significantly positive dose–response relationships between number of nevi and history of biopsy-confirmed BBD (n = 5,169; ptrend<0.0001) and family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives (n = 7,472; ptrend = 0.0003). The main limitations of our study include self-report of number of nevi using a qualitative scale, and self-reported history of biopsied BBD.
Conclusions
Our findings suggest associations between number of nevi and the risk of premenopausal breast cancer, BBD, and family history of breast cancer. More research is warranted to elucidate these relationships and to understand their underlying mechanisms.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Editors' Summary
Background
In 2012, nearly 1.7 million women worldwide discovered they had breast cancer, and about half a million women died from the disease. Breast cancer begins when cells in the breast acquire genetic changes that allow them to divide uncontrollably and to move around the body (metastasize). Uncontrolled cell division leads to the formation of a lump that can be detected by mammography (a breast X-ray) or by manual breast examination. Breast cancer is treated by surgical removal of the lump, or, if the cancer has started to spread, by removal of the whole breast (mastectomy). Surgery is usually followed by radiotherapy or chemotherapy to kill any remaining cancer cells. Because the female sex hormones estrogen and progesterone stimulate the growth of some tumors, drugs that block hormone receptors are also used to treat receptor-positive breast cancer. Nowadays, the prognosis (outlook) for women with breast cancer is good, and in developed countries, nearly 90% of affected women are still alive five years after diagnosis.
Why Was This Study Done?
Several hormone-related factors affect a woman's chances of developing breast cancer. For example, women who have no children or who have them late in life have a higher breast cancer risk than women who have several children when they are young because pregnancy alters sex hormone levels. Interestingly, the development of moles (nevi)—dark skin blemishes that are risk factors for the development of melanoma, a type of skin cancer—may also be affected by estrogen and progesterone. Thus, the number of nevi might be a marker of blood hormone levels and might predict breast cancer risk. In this prospective cohort study, the researchers test this hypothesis by investigating the association between how many moles a woman has and her breast cancer risk. A prospective cohort study enrolls a group (cohort) of people, determines their baseline characteristics, and follows them over time to see which characteristics are associated with the development of specific diseases.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
In 1990, the E3N prospective cohort study enrolled nearly 100,000 French women (mainly school teachers) aged 40–65 years to investigate cancer risk factors. The women completed a baseline questionnaire about their lifestyle and medical history, and regular follow-up questionnaires that asked about cancer occurrence. In the initial questionnaire, the women indicated whether they had no, a few, many, or very many moles. Between 1990 and 2008, nearly 6,000 women in the cohort developed breast cancer. Using statistical methods to calculate hazard ratios (an “HR” compares how often a particular event happens in two groups with different characteristics; an HR greater than one indicates that a specific characteristic is associated with an increased risk of the event), the researchers report that women with “very many” nevi had a significantly higher breast cancer risk (a higher risk that was unlikely to have occurred by chance) than women with no nevi. Specifically, the age-adjusted HR for breast cancer among women with “very many” nevi compared to women with no nevi was 1.17. After adjustment for a personal history of benign (noncancerous) breast disease and a family history of breast cancer (two established risk factors for breast cancer), the association between nevi and breast cancer risk among the whole cohort became nonsignificant. Notably, however, the association among only premenopausal women remained significant after full adjustment (HR = 1.34), which corresponded to an increase in ten-year absolute risk of invasive breast cancer from 2,515 per 100,000 women with no nevi to 3,370 per 100,000 women with “very many” nevi.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings suggest that among premenopausal women there is a modest association between nevi number and breast cancer risk. This noncausal relationship may indicate that nevi and breast diseases are affected in similar ways by hormones or share common genetic factors, but the accuracy of these findings may be limited by aspects of the study design. For example, self-report of nevi numbers using a qualitative scale may have introduced some inaccuracies into the estimates of the association between nevi number and breast cancer risk. Most importantly, these findings are insufficient to support the use of nevi counts in breast cancer screening or diagnosis. Rather, together with the findings reported by Zhang et al. in an independent PLOS Medicine Research Article, they suggest that further studies into the biological mechanisms underlying the relationship between nevi and breast cancer and the association itself should be undertaken.
Additional Information
Please access these websites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001660.
This study is further discussed in a PLOS Medicine Perspective by Fuhrman and Cardenas
An independent PLOS Medicine Research Article by Zhang et al. also investigates the relationship between nevi number and breast cancer risk
The US National Cancer Institute provides comprehensive information about cancer (in English and Spanish), including detailed information for patients and professionals about breast cancer; it also has a fact sheet on moles
Cancer Research UK, a not-for profit organization, provides information about cancer, including detailed information on breast cancer
The UK National Health Service Choices website has information and personal stories about breast cancer; the not-for profit organization Healthtalkonline also provides personal stories about dealing with breast cancer
More information about the E3N prospective cohort study is available; detailed information is available in French
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001660
PMCID: PMC4051602  PMID: 24915306
11.  Association between Cutaneous Nevi and Breast Cancer in the Nurses' Health Study: A Prospective Cohort Study 
PLoS Medicine  2014;11(6):e1001659.
Using data from the Nurses' Health Study, Jiali Han and colleagues examine the association between number of cutaneous nevi and the risk for breast cancer.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Background
Cutaneous nevi are suggested to be hormone-related. We hypothesized that the number of cutaneous nevi might be a phenotypic marker of plasma hormone levels and predict subsequent breast cancer risk.
Methods and Findings
We followed 74,523 female nurses for 24 y (1986–2010) in the Nurses' Health Study and estimate the relative risk of breast cancer according to the number of cutaneous nevi. We adjusted for the known breast cancer risk factors in the models. During follow-up, a total of 5,483 invasive breast cancer cases were diagnosed. Compared to women with no nevi, women with more cutaneous nevi had higher risks of breast cancer (multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98–1.10 for 1–5 nevi; 1.15, 95% CI, 1.00–1.31 for 6–14 nevi, and 1.35, 95% CI, 1.04–1.74 for 15 or more nevi; p for continuous trend = 0.003). Over 24 y of follow-up, the absolute risk of developing breast cancer increased from 8.48% for women without cutaneous nevi to 8.82% (95% CI, 8.31%–9.33%) for women with 1–5 nevi, 9.75% (95% CI, 8.48%–11.11%) for women with 6–14 nevi, and 11.4% (95% CI, 8.82%–14.76%) for women with 15 or more nevi. The number of cutaneous nevi was associated with increased risk of breast cancer only among estrogen receptor (ER)–positive tumors (multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio per five nevi, 1.09, 95% CI, 1.02–1.16 for ER+/progesterone receptor [PR]–positive tumors; 1.08, 95% CI, 0.94–1.24 for ER+/PR− tumors; and 0.99, 95% CI, 0.86–1.15 for ER−/PR− tumors). Additionally, we tested plasma hormone levels according to the number of cutaneous nevi among a subgroup of postmenopausal women without postmenopausal hormone use (n = 611). Postmenopausal women with six or more nevi had a 45.5% higher level of free estradiol and a 47.4% higher level of free testosterone compared to those with no nevi (p for trend = 0.001 for both). Among a subgroup of 362 breast cancer cases and 611 matched controls with plasma hormone measurements, the multivariable-adjusted odds ratio for every five nevi attenuated from 1.25 (95% CI, 0.89–1.74) to 1.16 (95% CI, 0.83–1.64) after adjusting for plasma hormone levels. Key limitations in this study are that cutaneous nevi were self-counted in our cohort and that the study was conducted in white individuals, and thus the findings do not necessarily apply to other populations.
Conclusions
Our results suggest that the number of cutaneous nevi may reflect plasma hormone levels and predict breast cancer risk independently of previously known factors.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Editors' Summary
Background
One woman in eight will develop breast cancer during her lifetime. Breast cancer begins when cells in the breast acquire genetic changes that allow them to divide uncontrollably (which leads to the formation of a lump in the breast) and to move around the body (metastasize). The treatment of breast cancer, which is diagnosed using mammography (a breast X-ray) or manual breast examination and biopsy, usually involves surgery to remove the lump, or the whole breast (mastectomy) if the cancer has started to metastasize. After surgery, women often receive chemotherapy or radiotherapy to kill any remaining cancer cells and may also be given drugs that block the action of estrogen and progesterone, female sex hormones that stimulate the growth of some breast cancer cells. Globally, half a million women die from breast cancer each year. However, in developed countries, nearly 90% of women affected by breast cancer are still alive five years after diagnosis.
Why Was This Study Done?
Several sex hormone–related factors affect breast cancer risk, including at what age a woman has her first child (pregnancy alters sex hormone levels) and her age at menopause, when estrogen levels normally drop. Moreover, postmenopausal women with high circulating levels of estrogen and testosterone (a male sex hormone) have an increased breast cancer risk. Interestingly, moles (nevi)—dark skin blemishes that are a risk factor for the development of melanoma, a type of skin cancer—often darken or enlarge during pregnancy. Might the number of nevi be a marker of hormone levels, and could nevi counts therefore be used to predict an individual's risk of breast cancer? In this prospective cohort study, the researchers look for an association between number of nevi and breast cancer risk among participants in the US Nurses' Health Study (NHS). A prospective cohort study enrolls a group of people, determines their baseline characteristics, and follows them over time to see which characteristics are associated with the development of certain diseases. The NHS, which enrolled 121,700 female nurses aged 30–55 years in 1976, is studying risk factors for cancer and other chronic diseases in women.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
In 1986, nearly 75,000 NHS participants (all of whom were white) reported how many nevi they had on their left arm. Over the next 24 years, 5,483 invasive breast cancers were diagnosed in these women. Compared to women with no nevi, women with increasing numbers of nevi had a higher risk of breast cancer after adjustment for known breast cancer risk factors. Specifically, among women with 1–5 nevi, the hazard ratio (HR) for breast cancer was 1.04, whereas among women with 15 or more nevi the HR was 1.35. An HR compares how often a particular event occurs in two groups with different characteristics; an HR greater than one indicates that a specific characteristic is associated with an increased risk of the event. Over 24 years of follow-up, the absolute risk of developing breast cancer was 8.48% in women with no nevi but 11.4% for women with 15 or more nevi. Notably, postmenopausal women with six or more nevi had higher blood levels of estrogen and testosterone than women with no nevi. Finally, in a subgroup analysis, the association between number of nevi and breast cancer risk disappeared after adjustment for hormone levels.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings support the hypothesis that the number of nevi reflects sex hormone levels in women and may predict breast cancer risk. Notably, they show that the association between breast cancer risk and nevus number was independent of known risk factors for breast cancer, and that the risk of breast cancer increased with the number of nevi in a dose-dependent manner. These findings also suggest that a hormonal mechanism underlies the association between nevus number and breast cancer risk. Because this study involved only white participants, these findings may not apply to non-white women. Moreover, the use of self-reported data on nevus numbers may affect the accuracy of these findings. Finally, because this study is observational, these findings are insufficient to support any changes in clinical recommendations for breast cancer screening or diagnosis. Nevertheless, these data and those in an independent PLOS Medicine Research Article by Kvaskoff et al. support the need for further investigation of the association between nevi and breast cancer risk and of the mechanisms underlying this relationship.
Additional Information
Please access these websites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001659.
An independent PLOS Medicine Research Article by Kvaskoff et al. also investigates the relationship between nevi and breast cancer risk
The US National Cancer Institute provides comprehensive information about cancer (in English and Spanish), including detailed information for patients and professionals about breast cancer; it also has a fact sheet on moles
Cancer Research UK, a not-for profit organization, provides information about cancer, including detailed information on breast cancer
The UK National Health Service Choices website has information and personal stories about breast cancer; the not-for profit organization Healthtalkonline also provides personal stories about dealing with breast cancer
More information about the Nurses' Health Study is available
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001659
PMCID: PMC4051600  PMID: 24915186
12.  The sociocultural health behavioral model and disparities in colorectal cancer screening among Chinese Americans 
Objective
The purpose of this study was to validate a Sociocultural Health Behavior Model using a structural equation analysis to determine the direction and magnitude of the interdependence of model components in relation to health behavior associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) screening among Chinese Americans.
Methods
A cross-sectional design included a sample of 311 Chinese American men and women age 50 and older. The initial step involved use of confirmatory factor analysis which included the following variables: access/satisfaction with health care, enabling, predisposing, cultural, and health belief factors. Structural equation modeling analyses were conducted on factors for CRC screening.
Results
Education and health insurance status were significantly related to CRC screening. Those with less than a high school education and without health insurance were more likely to be “never screened” for CRC than those having more education and health insurance. The path analysis findings also lend support for components of the Sociocultural Health Belief Model and indicated that there was a positive and significant relationship between CRC screening and the enabling factors, between cultural factors and predisposing, enabling, and access/satisfaction with health care factors and between enabling factors and access/satisfaction with health care.
Conclusions
The model highlights the significance that sociocultural factors play in relation to CRC screening and reinforced the need to assist Chinese with poor English proficiency in translation and awareness of the importance of CRC screening. The use of community organizations may play a role in assisting Chinese to enhance colorectal cancer screening rates.
doi:10.5430/jnep.v3n7p129
PMCID: PMC4214268  PMID: 25364475
Colorectal cancer; Cancer screening; Chinese Americans; Sociocultural health behavior model; Structural equation modeling
13.  Delays in Cancer Care Among Low-Income Minorities Despite Access 
Journal of Women's Health  2015;24(6):506-514.
Abstract
Introduction: Narrowing the racial/ethnic and socioeconomic disparities in breast and cervical cancer requires an in-depth understanding of motivation for adherence to cancer screening and follow-up care. To inform patient-centered interventions, this study aimed to identify reasons why low-income women adhered to or delayed breast or cervical cancer screening, follow-up and treatment despite access to cancer care-related services.
Methods: Semistructured qualitative interviews were conducted among women with access to cancer care-related services receiving care at an academic cancer center, federally qualified health centers, or free clinics in the Chicago metropolitan area. Transcripts were coded and analyzed for themes related to rationales for adherence.
Results: Among 138 participants, most were African American (46%) or Hispanic (36%), English speaking (70%), and between ages 41 and 65 years (64%). Primary drivers of nonadherence included lack of knowledge of resources, denial or fear, competing obligations, and embarrassment. Facilitators included abnormality identification, patient activation, provider-initiated actions, and motivation from family or friends.
Conclusions: Interventions targeting increased adherence to care among low-income and ethnic minority women should direct efforts to proactive, culturally and patient-informed education that enables patients to access resources and use the health care system, address misconceptions about cancer, ensure health care providers' communication of screening guidelines, and leverage the patient's social support network.
doi:10.1089/jwh.2014.4998
PMCID: PMC4490771  PMID: 26070037
14.  “I want to save my life”: Conceptions of cervical and breast cancer screening among urban immigrant women of South Asian and Chinese origin 
BMC Public Health  2016;16:1077.
Background
Breast and cervical cancer screening rates remain low among immigrant women and those of low socioeconomic status. The Cancer Awareness: Ready for Education and Screening (CARES) project ran a peer-led multi-lingual educational program between 2012 and 2014 to reach under and never-screened women in Central Toronto, where breast and cervical cancer screening rates remain low.
The objective of this qualitative study was to better understand how Chinese and South Asian immigrants – the largest and most under-screened immigrant groups according to national and provincial statistics - conceive of breast and cervical cancer screening. We explored their experiences with screening to date. We explicitly inquired about their perceptions of the health care system, their screening experiences with family physicians and strategies that would support screening in their communities.
Methods
We conducted 22 individual interviews and two focus groups in Bengali and Mandarin with participants who had attended CARES educational sessions. Transcripts were coded through an iterative constant comparative and interpretative approach.
Results
Themes fell into five major, overlapping domains: risk perception and concepts of preventative health and screening; health system engagement and the embedded experience with screening; fear of cancer and procedural pain; self-efficacy, obligation, and willingness to be screened; newcomer barriers and competing priorities. These domains all overlap, and contribute to screening behaviours. Immigrant women experienced a number of barriers to screening related to ‘navigating newness’, including transportation, language barriers, arrangements for time off work and childcare. Fear of screening and fear of cancer took many forms; painful or traumatic encounters with screening were described. Female gender of the provider was paramount for both groups. Newly screened South Asian women were reassured by their first encounter with screening. Some Chinese women preferred the anonymous screening options available in China. Women generally endorsed a willingness to be screened, and even offered to organize women in their community hubs to access screening.
Conclusions
The experience of South Asian and Chinese immigrant women suggests that under and never-screened newcomers may be effectively integrated into screening programs through existing primary care networks, cultural-group specific outreach, and expanding access to convenient community -based screening.
doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3709-2
PMCID: PMC5062908  PMID: 27733161
Immigrant; South Asian; Chinese; Women; Access; Cancer; Screening; Behaviour; Qualitative; Policy; Health systems
15.  Factors Associated with Breast Cancer Screening in Asian Indian Women in Metro-Detroit 
Few studies have examined social factors related to breast cancer screening in Asian Indian women in the Midwestern US. This cross-sectional, community-based survey utilized constructs of the Health Belief Model to examine factors associated with breast cancer screening among Asian Indian women in metropolitan Detroit, Michigan. Of the 160 participants, 63.8% reported receiving both a clinical breast exam and mammogram within the past 2 years. Women were more likely to screen for breast cancer if they had a college education, lived in the US for more years, perceived that breast cancer screening is useful in detecting breast cancer early, agreed that mammography was important, and received a recommendation by a healthcare provider to get a mammogram. These findings highlight the need for further research on regional differences in breast cancer screening knowledge, behaviors and predictors among Asian Pacific Islanders subgroups such as Asian Indian women who recently immigrated to the US.
doi:10.1007/s10903-009-9277-0
PMCID: PMC4276127  PMID: 19629691
Asian Indian; Asian Pacific Islander; Breast cancer; Cancer screening; Health belief model
16.  Smoking and high-risk mammographic parenchymal patterns: a case-control study 
Breast Cancer Research  1999;2(1):59-63.
Current smoking was strongly and inversely associated with high-risk patterns, after adjustment for concomitant risk factors. Relative to never smokers, current smokers were significantly less likely to have a high-risk pattern. Similar results were obtained when the analysis was confined to postmenopausal women. Past smoking was not related to the mammographic parenchymal patterns. The overall effect in postmenopausal women lost its significance when adjusted for other risk factors for P2/DY patterns that were found to be significant in the present study, although the results are still strongly suggestive. The present data indicate that adjustment for current smoking status is important when evaluating the relationship between mammographic parenchymal pattern and breast cancer risk. They also indicate that smoking is a prominent potential confounder when analyzing effects of other risk factors such as obesity-related variables. It appears that parenchymal patterns may act as an informative biomarker of the effect of cigarette smoking on breast cancer risk.
Introduction:
Overall, epidemiological studies [1,2,3,4] have reported no substantial association between cigarette smoking and the risk of breast cancer. Some studies [5,6,7] reported a significant increase of breast cancer risk among smokers. In recent studies that addressed the association between breast cancer and cigarette smoking, however, there was some suggestion of a decreased risk [8,9,10], especially among current smokers, ranging from approximately 10 to 30% [9,10]. Brunet et al [11] reported that smoking might reduce the risk of breast cancer by 44% in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations. Wolfe [12] described four different mammographic patterns created by variations in the relative amounts of fat, epithelial and connective tissue in the breast, designated N1, P1, P2 and DY. Women with either P2 or DY pattern are considered at greater risk for breast cancer than those with N1 or P1 pattern [12,13,14,15]. There are no published studies that assessed the relationship between smoking and mammographic parenchymal patterns.
Aims:
To evaluate whether mammographic parenchymal patterns as classified by Wolfe, which have been positively associated with breast cancer risk, are affected by smoking. In this case-control study, nested within the European Prospective Investigation on Cancer in Norfolk (EPIC-Norfolk) cohort [16], the association between smoking habits and mammographic parenchymal patterns are examined. The full results will be published elsewhere.
Methods:
Study subjects were members of the EPIC cohort in Norwich who also attended the prevalence screening round at the Norwich Breast Screening Centre between November 1989 and December 1997, and were free of breast cancer at that screening. Cases were defined as women with a P2/DY Wolfe's mammographic parenchymal pattern on the prevalence screen mammograms. A total of 203 women with P2/DY patterns were identified as cases and were individually matched by date of birth (within 1 year) and date of prevalence screening (within 3 months) with 203 women with N1/P1 patterns who served as control individuals.
Two views, the mediolateral and craniocaudal mammograms, of both breasts were independently reviewed by two of the authors (ES and RW) to determine the Wolfe mammographic parenchymal pattern.
Considerable information on health and lifestyle factors was available from the EPIC Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire [16]. In the present study we examined the subjects' personal history of benign breast diseases, menstrual and reproductive factors, oral contraception and hormone replacement therapy, smoking, and anthropometric information such as body mass index and waist:hip ratio.
Odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by conditional logistic regression [17], and were adjusted for possible confounding factors.
Results:
The characteristics of the cases and controls are presented in Table 1. Cases were leaner than controls. A larger percentage of cases were nulliparous, premenopausal, current hormone replacement therapy users, had a personal history of benign breast diseases, and had had a hysterectomy. A larger proportion of controls had more than three births and were current smokers.
Table 2 shows the unadjusted and adjusted OR estimates for Wolfe's high-risk mammographic parenchymal patterns and smoking in the total study population and in postmenopausal women separately. Current smoking was strongly and inversely associated with high-risk patterns, after adjustment for concomitant risk factors. Relative to never smokers, current smokers were significantly less likely to have a high-risk pattern (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.14-0.94). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was confined to postmenopausal women. Past smoking was not related to mammographic parenchymal patterns. The overall effect in postmenopausal women lost its significance when adjusted for other risk factors for P2/DY patterns that were found to be significant in the present study, although the results were still strongly suggestive. There was no interaction between cigarette smoking and body mass index.
Discussion:
In the present study we found a strong inverse relationship between current smoking and high-risk mammographic parenchymal patterns of breast tissue as classified by Wolfe [12]. These findings are not completely unprecedented; Greendale et al [18] found a reduced risk of breast density in association with smoking, although the magnitude of the reduction was unclear. The present findings suggest that this reduction is large.
Recent studies [9,10] have suggested that breast cancer risk may be reduced among current smokers. In a multicentre Italian case-control study, Braga et al [10] found that, relative to nonsmokers, current smokers had a reduced risk of breast cancer (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.7-1.0). These findings were recently supported by Gammon et al [9], who reported that breast cancer risk in younger women (younger than 45 years) may be reduced among current smokers who began smoking at an early age (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41-0.85 for age 15 years or younger) and among long-term smokers (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.94 for those who had smoked for 21 years or more).
The possible protective effect of smoking might be due to its anti-oestrogenic effect [1,2,19]. Recently there has been renewed interest in the potential effect of smoking on breast cancer risk, and whether individuals may respond differently on the basis of differences in metabolism of bioproducts of smoking [20,21]. Different relationships between smoking and breast cancer risk have been suggested that are dependent on the rapid or slow status of acetylators of aromatic amines [20,21]. More recent studies [22,23], however, do not support these findings.
The present study design minimized the opportunity for bias to influence the findings. Because subjects were unaware of their own case-control status, the possibility of recall bias in reporting smoking status was minimized. Systematic error in the assessment of mammograms was avoided because reading was done without knowledge of the risk factor data. Furthermore, the associations observed are unlikely to be explained by the confounding effect of other known breast cancer risk factors, because we adjusted for these in the analysis. We did not have information on passive smoking status, however, which has recently been reported to be a possible confounder [5,6,21,24].
The present data indicate that adjustment for current smoking status is important when evaluating the relationship between mammographic parenchymal pattern and breast cancer risk. They also indicate smoking as a prominent potential confounder when analyzing effects of other risk factors such as obesity-related variables. It seems that parenchymal patterns may act as an informative biomarker of the effect of cigarette smoking on breast cancer risk.
PMCID: PMC13911  PMID: 11056684
mammography; screening; smoking; Wolfe's parenchymal patterns
17.  Progress Toward Consensus on Breast Cancer Screening Guidelines and Reducing Screening Harms 
JAMA internal medicine  2015;175(12):1970-1971.
IMPORTANCE
Breast cancer is a leading cause of premature mortality among US women. Early detection has been shown to be associated with reduced breast cancer morbidity and mortality.
OBJECTIVE
To update the American Cancer Society (ACS) 2003 breast cancer screening guideline for women at average risk for breast cancer.
PROCESS
The ACS commissioned a systematic evidence review of the breast cancer screening literature to inform the update and a supplemental analysis of mammography registry data to address questions related to the screening interval. Formulation of recommendations was based on the quality of the evidence and judgment (incorporating values and preferences) about the balance of benefits and harms.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Screening mammography in women aged 40 to 69 years is associated with a reduction in breast cancer deaths across a range of study designs, and inferential evidence supports breast cancer screening for women 70 years and older who are in good health. Estimates of the cumulative lifetime risk of false-positive examination results are greater if screening begins at younger ages because of the greater number of mammograms, as well as the higher recall rate in younger women. The quality of the evidence for overdiagnosis is not sufficient to estimate a lifetime risk with confidence. Analysis examining the screening interval demonstrates more favorable tumor characteristics when premenopausal women are screened annually vs biennially. Evidence does not support routine clinical breast examination as a screening method for women at average risk.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The ACS recommends that women with an average risk of breast cancer should undergo regular screening mammography starting at age 45 years (strong recommendation). Women aged 45 to 54 years should be screened annually (qualified recommendation). Women 55 years and older should transition to biennial screening or have the opportunity to continue screening annually (qualified recommendation). Women should have the opportunity to begin annual screening between the ages of 40 and 44 years (qualified recommendation). Women should continue screening mammography as long as their overall health is good and they have a life expectancy of 10 years or longer (qualified recommendation). The ACS does not recommend clinical breast examination for breast cancer screening among average-risk women at any age (qualified recommendation).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
These updated ACS guidelines provide evidence-based recommendations for breast cancer screening for women at average risk of breast cancer. These recommendations should be considered by physicians and women in discussions about breast cancer screening.
doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.6466
PMCID: PMC4869718  PMID: 26502319
18.  Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation 
Chambers, David | Simpson, Lisa | Hill-Briggs, Felicia | Neta, Gila | Vinson, Cynthia | Chambers, David | Beidas, Rinad | Marcus, Steven | Aarons, Gregory | Hoagwood, Kimberly | Schoenwald, Sonja | Evans, Arthur | Hurford, Matthew | Rubin, Ronnie | Hadley, Trevor | Barg, Frances | Walsh, Lucia | Adams, Danielle | Mandell, David | Martin, Lindsey | Mignogna, Joseph | Mott, Juliette | Hundt, Natalie | Kauth, Michael | Kunik, Mark | Naik, Aanand | Cully, Jeffrey | McGuire, Alan | White, Dominique | Bartholomew, Tom | McGrew, John | Luther, Lauren | Rollins, Angie | Salyers, Michelle | Cooper, Brittany | Funaiole, Angie | Richards, Julie | Lee, Amy | Lapham, Gwen | Caldeiro, Ryan | Lozano, Paula | Gildred, Tory | Achtmeyer, Carol | Ludman, Evette | Addis, Megan | Marx, Larry | Bradley, Katharine | VanDeinse, Tonya | Wilson, Amy Blank | Stacey, Burgin | Powell, Byron | Bunger, Alicia | Cuddeback, Gary | Barnett, Miya | Stadnick, Nicole | Brookman-Frazee, Lauren | Lau, Anna | Dorsey, Shannon | Pullmann, Michael | Mitchell, Shannon | Schwartz, Robert | Kirk, Arethusa | Dusek, Kristi | Oros, Marla | Hosler, Colleen | Gryczynski, Jan | Barbosa, Carolina | Dunlap, Laura | Lounsbury, David | O’Grady, Kevin | Brown, Barry | Damschroder, Laura | Waltz, Thomas | Powell, Byron | Ritchie, Mona | Waltz, Thomas | Atkins, David | Imel, Zac E. | Xiao, Bo | Can, Doğan | Georgiou, Panayiotis | Narayanan, Shrikanth | Berkel, Cady | Gallo, Carlos | Sandler, Irwin | Brown, C. Hendricks | Wolchik, Sharlene | Mauricio, Anne Marie | Gallo, Carlos | Brown, C. Hendricks | Mehrotra, Sanjay | Chandurkar, Dharmendra | Bora, Siddhartha | Das, Arup | Tripathi, Anand | Saggurti, Niranjan | Raj, Anita | Hughes, Eric | Jacobs, Brian | Kirkendall, Eric | Loeb, Danielle | Trinkley, Katy | Yang, Michael | Sprowell, Andrew | Nease, Donald | Lyon, Aaron | Lewis, Cara | Boyd, Meredith | Melvin, Abigail | Nicodimos, Semret | Liu, Freda | Jungbluth, Nathanial | Lyon, Aaron | Lewis, Cara | Boyd, Meredith | Melvin, Abigail | Nicodimos, Semret | Liu, Freda | Jungbluth, Nathanial | Flynn, Allen | Landis-Lewis, Zach | Sales, Anne | Baloh, Jure | Ward, Marcia | Zhu, Xi | Bennett, Ian | Unutzer, Jurgen | Mao, Johnny | Proctor, Enola | Vredevoogd, Mindy | Chan, Ya-Fen | Williams, Nathaniel | Green, Phillip | Bernstein, Steven | Rosner, June-Marie | DeWitt, Michelle | Tetrault, Jeanette | Dziura, James | Hsiao, Allen | Sussman, Scott | O’Connor, Patrick | Toll, Benjamin | Jones, Michael | Gassaway, Julie | Tobin, Jonathan | Zatzick, Douglas | Bradbury, Angela R. | Patrick-Miller, Linda | Egleston, Brian | Olopade, Olufunmilayo I. | Hall, Michael J. | Daly, Mary B. | Fleisher, Linda | Grana, Generosa | Ganschow, Pamela | Fetzer, Dominique | Brandt, Amanda | Farengo-Clark, Dana | Forman, Andrea | Gaber, Rikki S. | Gulden, Cassandra | Horte, Janice | Long, Jessica | Chambers, Rachelle Lorenz | Lucas, Terra | Madaan, Shreshtha | Mattie, Kristin | McKenna, Danielle | Montgomery, Susan | Nielsen, Sarah | Powers, Jacquelyn | Rainey, Kim | Rybak, Christina | Savage, Michelle | Seelaus, Christina | Stoll, Jessica | Stopfer, Jill | Yao, Shirley | Domchek, Susan | Hahn, Erin | Munoz-Plaza, Corrine | Wang, Jianjin | Delgadillo, Jazmine Garcia | Mittman, Brian | Gould, Michael | Liang, Shuting (Lily) | Kegler, Michelle C. | Cotter, Megan | Phillips, Emily | Hermstad, April | Morton, Rentonia | Beasley, Derrick | Martinez, Jeremy | Riehman, Kara | Gustafson, David | Marsch, Lisa | Mares, Louise | Quanbeck, Andrew | McTavish, Fiona | McDowell, Helene | Brown, Randall | Thomas, Chantelle | Glass, Joseph | Isham, Joseph | Shah, Dhavan | Liebschutz, Jane | Lasser, Karen | Watkins, Katherine | Ober, Allison | Hunter, Sarah | Lamp, Karen | Ewing, Brett | Iwelunmor, Juliet | Gyamfi, Joyce | Blackstone, Sarah | Quakyi, Nana Kofi | Plange-Rhule, Jacob | Ogedegbe, Gbenga | Kumar, Pritika | Van Devanter, Nancy | Nguyen, Nam | Nguyen, Linh | Nguyen, Trang | Phuong, Nguyet | Shelley, Donna | Rudge, Sian | Langlois, Etienne | Tricco, Andrea | Ball, Sherry | Lambert-Kerzner, Anne | Sulc, Christine | Simmons, Carol | Shell-Boyd, Jeneen | Oestreich, Taryn | O’Connor, Ashley | Neely, Emily | McCreight, Marina | Labebue, Amy | DiFiore, Doreen | Brostow, Diana | Ho, P. Michael | Aron, David | Harvey, Jillian | McHugh, Megan | Scanlon, Dennis | Lee, Rebecca | Soltero, Erica | Parker, Nathan | McNeill, Lorna | Ledoux, Tracey | McIsaac, Jessie-Lee | MacLeod, Kate | Ata, Nicole | Jarvis, Sherry | Kirk, Sara | Purtle, Jonathan | Dodson, Elizabeth | Brownson, Ross | Mittman, Brian | Curran, Geoffrey | Curran, Geoffrey | Pyne, Jeffrey | Aarons, Gregory | Ehrhart, Mark | Torres, Elisa | Miech, Edward | Miech, Edward | Stevens, Kathleen | Hamilton, Alison | Cohen, Deborah | Padgett, Deborah | Morshed, Alexandra | Patel, Rupa | Prusaczyk, Beth | Aron, David C. | Gupta, Divya | Ball, Sherry | Hand, Rosa | Abram, Jenica | Wolfram, Taylor | Hastings, Molly | Moreland-Russell, Sarah | Tabak, Rachel | Ramsey, Alex | Baumann, Ana | Kryzer, Emily | Montgomery, Katherine | Lewis, Ericka | Padek, Margaret | Powell, Byron | Brownson, Ross | Mamaril, Cezar Brian | Mays, Glen | Branham, Keith | Timsina, Lava | Mays, Glen | Hogg, Rachel | Fagan, Abigail | Shapiro, Valerie | Brown, Eric | Haggerty, Kevin | Hawkins, David | Oesterle, Sabrina | Hawkins, David | Catalano, Richard | McKay, Virginia | Dolcini, M. Margaret | Hoffer, Lee | Moin, Tannaz | Li, Jinnan | Duru, O. Kenrik | Ettner, Susan | Turk, Norman | Chan, Charles | Keckhafer, Abigail | Luchs, Robert | Ho, Sam | Mangione, Carol | Selby, Peter | Zawertailo, Laurie | Minian, Nadia | Balliunas, Dolly | Dragonetti, Rosa | Hussain, Sarwar | Lecce, Julia | Chinman, Matthew | Acosta, Joie | Ebener, Patricia | Malone, Patrick S. | Slaughter, Mary | Freedman, Darcy | Flocke, Susan | Lee, Eunlye | Matlack, Kristen | Trapl, Erika | Ohri-Vachaspati, Punam | Taggart, Morgan | Borawski, Elaine | Parrish, Amanda | Harris, Jeffrey | Kohn, Marlana | Hammerback, Kristen | McMillan, Becca | Hannon, Peggy | Swindle, Taren | Curran, Geoffrey | Whiteside-Mansell, Leanne | Ward, Wendy | Holt, Cheryl | Santos, Sheri Lou | Tagai, Erin | Scheirer, Mary Ann | Carter, Roxanne | Bowie, Janice | Haider, Muhiuddin | Slade, Jimmie | Wang, Min Qi | Masica, Andrew | Ogola, Gerald | Berryman, Candice | Richter, Kathleen | Shelton, Rachel | Jandorf, Lina | Erwin, Deborah | Truong, Khoa | Javier, Joyce R. | Coffey, Dean | Schrager, Sheree M. | Palinkas, Lawrence | Miranda, Jeanne | Johnson, Veda | Hutcherson, Valerie | Ellis, Ruth | Kharmats, Anna | Marshall-King, Sandra | LaPradd, Monica | Fonseca-Becker, Fannie | Kepka, Deanna | Bodson, Julia | Warner, Echo | Fowler, Brynn | Shenkman, Elizabeth | Hogan, William | Odedina, Folakami | De Leon, Jessica | Hooper, Monica | Carrasquillo, Olveen | Reams, Renee | Hurt, Myra | Smith, Steven | Szapocznik, Jose | Nelson, David | Mandal, Prabir | Teufel, James
Implementation Science : IS  2016;11(Suppl 2):100.
Table of contents
A1 Introduction to the 8th Annual Conference on the Science of Dissemination and Implementation: Optimizing Personal and Population Health
David Chambers, Lisa Simpson
D1 Discussion forum: Population health D&I research
Felicia Hill-Briggs
D2 Discussion forum: Global health D&I research
Gila Neta, Cynthia Vinson
D3 Discussion forum: Precision medicine and D&I research
David Chambers
S1 Predictors of community therapists’ use of therapy techniques in a large public mental health system
Rinad Beidas, Steven Marcus, Gregory Aarons, Kimberly Hoagwood, Sonja Schoenwald, Arthur Evans, Matthew Hurford, Ronnie Rubin, Trevor Hadley, Frances Barg, Lucia Walsh, Danielle Adams, David Mandell
S2 Implementing brief cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in primary care: Clinicians' experiences from the field
Lindsey Martin, Joseph Mignogna, Juliette Mott, Natalie Hundt, Michael Kauth, Mark Kunik, Aanand Naik, Jeffrey Cully
S3 Clinician competence: Natural variation, factors affecting, and effect on patient outcomes
Alan McGuire, Dominique White, Tom Bartholomew, John McGrew, Lauren Luther, Angie Rollins, Michelle Salyers
S4 Exploring the multifaceted nature of sustainability in community-based prevention: A mixed-method approach
Brittany Cooper, Angie Funaiole
S5 Theory informed behavioral health integration in primary care: Mixed methods evaluation of the implementation of routine depression and alcohol screening and assessment
Julie Richards, Amy Lee, Gwen Lapham, Ryan Caldeiro, Paula Lozano, Tory Gildred, Carol Achtmeyer, Evette Ludman, Megan Addis, Larry Marx, Katharine Bradley
S6 Enhancing the evidence for specialty mental health probation through a hybrid efficacy and implementation study
Tonya VanDeinse, Amy Blank Wilson, Burgin Stacey, Byron Powell, Alicia Bunger, Gary Cuddeback
S7 Personalizing evidence-based child mental health care within a fiscally mandated policy reform
Miya Barnett, Nicole Stadnick, Lauren Brookman-Frazee, Anna Lau
S8 Leveraging an existing resource for technical assistance: Community-based supervisors in public mental health
Shannon Dorsey, Michael Pullmann
S9 SBIRT implementation for adolescents in urban federally qualified health centers: Implementation outcomes
Shannon Mitchell, Robert Schwartz, Arethusa Kirk, Kristi Dusek, Marla Oros, Colleen Hosler, Jan Gryczynski, Carolina Barbosa, Laura Dunlap, David Lounsbury, Kevin O'Grady, Barry Brown
S10 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Expert recommendations for tailoring strategies to context
Laura Damschroder, Thomas Waltz, Byron Powell
S11 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Extreme facilitation: Helping challenged healthcare settings implement complex programs
Mona Ritchie
S12 PANEL: Tailoring Implementation Strategies to Context - Using menu-based choice tasks to obtain expert recommendations for implementing three high-priority practices in the VA
Thomas Waltz
S13 PANEL: The Use of Technology to Improve Efficient Monitoring of Implementation of Evidence-based Programs - Siri, rate my therapist: Using technology to automate fidelity ratings of motivational interviewing
David Atkins, Zac E. Imel, Bo Xiao, Doğan Can, Panayiotis Georgiou, Shrikanth Narayanan
S14 PANEL: The Use of Technology to Improve Efficient Monitoring of Implementation of Evidence-based Programs - Identifying indicators of implementation quality for computer-based ratings
Cady Berkel, Carlos Gallo, Irwin Sandler, C. Hendricks Brown, Sharlene Wolchik, Anne Marie Mauricio
S15 PANEL: The Use of Technology to Improve Efficient Monitoring of Implementation of Evidence-based Programs - Improving implementation of behavioral interventions by monitoring emotion in spoken speech
Carlos Gallo, C. Hendricks Brown, Sanjay Mehrotra
S16 Scorecards and dashboards to assure data quality of health management information system (HMIS) using R
Dharmendra Chandurkar, Siddhartha Bora, Arup Das, Anand Tripathi, Niranjan Saggurti, Anita Raj
S17 A big data approach for discovering and implementing patient safety insights
Eric Hughes, Brian Jacobs, Eric Kirkendall
S18 Improving the efficacy of a depression registry for use in a collaborative care model
Danielle Loeb, Katy Trinkley, Michael Yang, Andrew Sprowell, Donald Nease
S19 Measurement feedback systems as a strategy to support implementation of measurement-based care in behavioral health
Aaron Lyon, Cara Lewis, Meredith Boyd, Abigail Melvin, Semret Nicodimos, Freda Liu, Nathanial Jungbluth
S20 PANEL: Implementation Science and Learning Health Systems: Intersections and Commonalities - Common loop assay: Methods of supporting learning collaboratives
Allen Flynn
S21 PANEL: Implementation Science and Learning Health Systems: Intersections and Commonalities - Innovating audit and feedback using message tailoring models for learning health systems
Zach Landis-Lewis
S22 PANEL: Implementation Science and Learning Health Systems: Intersections and Commonalities - Implementation science and learning health systems: Connecting the dots
Anne Sales
S23 Facilitation activities of Critical Access Hospitals during TeamSTEPPS implementation
Jure Baloh, Marcia Ward, Xi Zhu
S24 Organizational and social context of federally qualified health centers and variation in maternal depression outcomes
Ian Bennett, Jurgen Unutzer, Johnny Mao, Enola Proctor, Mindy Vredevoogd, Ya-Fen Chan, Nathaniel Williams, Phillip Green
S25 Decision support to enhance treatment of hospitalized smokers: A randomized trial
Steven Bernstein, June-Marie Rosner, Michelle DeWitt, Jeanette Tetrault, James Dziura, Allen Hsiao, Scott Sussman, Patrick O’Connor, Benjamin Toll
S26 PANEL: Developing Sustainable Strategies for the Implementation of Patient-Centered Care across Diverse US Healthcare Systems - A patient-centered approach to successful community transition after catastrophic injury
Michael Jones, Julie Gassaway
S27 PANEL: Developing Sustainable Strategies for the Implementation of Patient-Centered Care across Diverse US Healthcare Systems - Conducting PCOR to integrate mental health and cancer screening services in primary care
Jonathan Tobin
S28 PANEL: Developing Sustainable Strategies for the Implementation of Patient-Centered Care across Diverse US Healthcare Systems - A comparative effectiveness trial of optimal patient-centered care for US trauma care systems
Douglas Zatzick
S29 Preferences for in-person communication among patients in a multi-center randomized study of in-person versus telephone communication of genetic test results for cancer susceptibility
Angela R Bradbury, Linda Patrick-Miller, Brian Egleston, Olufunmilayo I Olopade, Michael J Hall, Mary B Daly, Linda Fleisher, Generosa Grana, Pamela Ganschow, Dominique Fetzer, Amanda Brandt, Dana Farengo-Clark, Andrea Forman, Rikki S Gaber, Cassandra Gulden, Janice Horte, Jessica Long, Rachelle Lorenz Chambers, Terra Lucas, Shreshtha Madaan, Kristin Mattie, Danielle McKenna, Susan Montgomery, Sarah Nielsen, Jacquelyn Powers, Kim Rainey, Christina Rybak, Michelle Savage, Christina Seelaus, Jessica Stoll, Jill Stopfer, Shirley Yao and Susan Domchek
S30 Working towards de-implementation: A mixed methods study in breast cancer surveillance care
Erin Hahn, Corrine Munoz-Plaza, Jianjin Wang, Jazmine Garcia Delgadillo, Brian Mittman Michael Gould
S31Integrating evidence-based practices for increasing cancer screenings in safety-net primary care systems: A multiple case study using the consolidated framework for implementation research
Shuting (Lily) Liang, Michelle C. Kegler, Megan Cotter, Emily Phillips, April Hermstad, Rentonia Morton, Derrick Beasley, Jeremy Martinez, Kara Riehman
S32 Observations from implementing an mHealth intervention in an FQHC
David Gustafson, Lisa Marsch, Louise Mares, Andrew Quanbeck, Fiona McTavish, Helene McDowell, Randall Brown, Chantelle Thomas, Joseph Glass, Joseph Isham, Dhavan Shah
S33 A multicomponent intervention to improve primary care provider adherence to chronic opioid therapy guidelines and reduce opioid misuse: A cluster randomized controlled trial protocol
Jane Liebschutz, Karen Lasser
S34 Implementing collaborative care for substance use disorders in primary care: Preliminary findings from the summit study
Katherine Watkins, Allison Ober, Sarah Hunter, Karen Lamp, Brett Ewing
S35 Sustaining a task-shifting strategy for blood pressure control in Ghana: A stakeholder analysis
Juliet Iwelunmor, Joyce Gyamfi, Sarah Blackstone, Nana Kofi Quakyi, Jacob Plange-Rhule, Gbenga Ogedegbe
S36 Contextual adaptation of the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) in a tobacco cessation study in Vietnam
Pritika Kumar, Nancy Van Devanter, Nam Nguyen, Linh Nguyen, Trang Nguyen, Nguyet Phuong, Donna Shelley
S37 Evidence check: A knowledge brokering approach to systematic reviews for policy
Sian Rudge
S38 Using Evidence Synthesis to Strengthen Complex Health Systems in Low- and Middle-Income Countries
Etienne Langlois
S39 Does it matter: timeliness or accuracy of results? The choice of rapid reviews or systematic reviews to inform decision-making
Andrea Tricco
S40 Evaluation of the veterans choice program using lean six sigma at a VA medical center to identify benefits and overcome obstacles
Sherry Ball, Anne Lambert-Kerzner, Christine Sulc, Carol Simmons, Jeneen Shell-Boyd, Taryn Oestreich, Ashley O'Connor, Emily Neely, Marina McCreight, Amy Labebue, Doreen DiFiore, Diana Brostow, P. Michael Ho, David Aron
S41 The influence of local context on multi-stakeholder alliance quality improvement activities: A multiple case study
Jillian Harvey, Megan McHugh, Dennis Scanlon
S42 Increasing physical activity in early care and education: Sustainability via active garden education (SAGE)
Rebecca Lee, Erica Soltero, Nathan Parker, Lorna McNeill, Tracey Ledoux
S43 Marking a decade of policy implementation: The successes and continuing challenges of a provincial school food and nutrition policy in Canada
Jessie-Lee McIsaac, Kate MacLeod, Nicole Ata, Sherry Jarvis, Sara Kirk
S44 Use of research evidence among state legislators who prioritize mental health and substance abuse issues
Jonathan Purtle, Elizabeth Dodson, Ross Brownson
S45 PANEL: Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Designs: Clarifications, Refinements, and Additional Guidance Based on a Systematic Review and Reports from the Field - Hybrid type 1 designs
Brian Mittman, Geoffrey Curran
S46 PANEL: Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Designs: Clarifications, Refinements, and Additional Guidance Based on a Systematic Review and Reports from the Field - Hybrid type 2 designs
Geoffrey Curran
S47 PANEL: Effectiveness-Implementation Hybrid Designs: Clarifications, Refinements, and Additional Guidance Based on a Systematic Review and Reports from the Field - Hybrid type 3 designs
Jeffrey Pyne
S48 Linking team level implementation leadership and implementation climate to individual level attitudes, behaviors, and implementation outcomes
Gregory Aarons, Mark Ehrhart, Elisa Torres
S49 Pinpointing the specific elements of local context that matter most to implementation outcomes: Findings from qualitative comparative analysis in the RE-inspire study of VA acute stroke care
Edward Miech
S50 The GO score: A new context-sensitive instrument to measure group organization level for providing and improving care
Edward Miech
S51 A research network approach for boosting implementation and improvement
Kathleen Stevens, I.S.R.N. Steering Council
S52 PANEL: Qualitative methods in D&I Research: Value, rigor and challenge - The value of qualitative methods in implementation research
Alison Hamilton
S53 PANEL: Qualitative methods in D&I Research: Value, rigor and challenge - Learning evaluation: The role of qualitative methods in dissemination and implementation research
Deborah Cohen
S54 PANEL: Qualitative methods in D&I Research: Value, rigor and challenge - Qualitative methods in D&I research
Deborah Padgett
S55 PANEL: Maps & models: The promise of network science for clinical D&I - Hospital network of sharing patients with acute and chronic diseases in California
Alexandra Morshed
S56 PANEL: Maps & models: The promise of network science for clinical D&I - The use of social network analysis to identify dissemination targets and enhance D&I research study recruitment for pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV (PrEP) among men who have sex with men
Rupa Patel
S57 PANEL: Maps & models: The promise of network science for clinical D&I - Network and organizational factors related to the adoption of patient navigation services among rural breast cancer care providers
Beth Prusaczyk
S58 A theory of de-implementation based on the theory of healthcare professionals’ behavior and intention (THPBI) and the becker model of unlearning
David C. Aron, Divya Gupta, Sherry Ball
S59 Observation of registered dietitian nutritionist-patient encounters by dietetic interns highlights low awareness and implementation of evidence-based nutrition practice guidelines
Rosa Hand, Jenica Abram, Taylor Wolfram
S60 Program sustainability action planning: Building capacity for program sustainability using the program sustainability assessment tool
Molly Hastings, Sarah Moreland-Russell
S61 A review of D&I study designs in published study protocols
Rachel Tabak, Alex Ramsey, Ana Baumann, Emily Kryzer, Katherine Montgomery, Ericka Lewis, Margaret Padek, Byron Powell, Ross Brownson
S62 PANEL: Geographic variation in the implementation of public health services: Economic, organizational, and network determinants - Model simulation techniques to estimate the cost of implementing foundational public health services
Cezar Brian Mamaril, Glen Mays, Keith Branham, Lava Timsina
S63 PANEL: Geographic variation in the implementation of public health services: Economic, organizational, and network determinants - Inter-organizational network effects on the implementation of public health services
Glen Mays, Rachel Hogg
S64 PANEL: Building capacity for implementation and dissemination of the communities that care prevention system at scale to promote evidence-based practices in behavioral health - Implementation fidelity, coalition functioning, and community prevention system transformation using communities that care
Abigail Fagan, Valerie Shapiro, Eric Brown
S65 PANEL: Building capacity for implementation and dissemination of the communities that care prevention system at scale to promote evidence-based practices in behavioral health - Expanding capacity for implementation of communities that care at scale using a web-based, video-assisted training system
Kevin Haggerty, David Hawkins
S66 PANEL: Building capacity for implementation and dissemination of the communities that care prevention system at scale to promote evidence-based practices in behavioral health - Effects of communities that care on reducing youth behavioral health problems
Sabrina Oesterle, David Hawkins, Richard Catalano
S68 When interventions end: the dynamics of intervention de-adoption and replacement
Virginia McKay, M. Margaret Dolcini, Lee Hoffer
S69 Results from next-d: can a disease specific health plan reduce incident diabetes development among a national sample of working-age adults with pre-diabetes?
Tannaz Moin, Jinnan Li, O. Kenrik Duru, Susan Ettner, Norman Turk, Charles Chan, Abigail Keckhafer, Robert Luchs, Sam Ho, Carol Mangione
S70 Implementing smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings (STOP): using the interactive systems framework
Peter Selby, Laurie Zawertailo, Nadia Minian, Dolly Balliunas, Rosa Dragonetti, Sarwar Hussain, Julia Lecce
S71 Testing the Getting To Outcomes implementation support intervention in prevention-oriented, community-based settings
Matthew Chinman, Joie Acosta, Patricia Ebener, Patrick S Malone, Mary Slaughter
S72 Examining the reach of a multi-component farmers’ market implementation approach among low-income consumers in an urban context
Darcy Freedman, Susan Flocke, Eunlye Lee, Kristen Matlack, Erika Trapl, Punam Ohri-Vachaspati, Morgan Taggart, Elaine Borawski
S73 Increasing implementation of evidence-based health promotion practices at large workplaces: The CEOs Challenge
Amanda Parrish, Jeffrey Harris, Marlana Kohn, Kristen Hammerback, Becca McMillan, Peggy Hannon
S74 A qualitative assessment of barriers to nutrition promotion and obesity prevention in childcare
Taren Swindle, Geoffrey Curran, Leanne Whiteside-Mansell, Wendy Ward
S75 Documenting institutionalization of a health communication intervention in African American churches
Cheryl Holt, Sheri Lou Santos, Erin Tagai, Mary Ann Scheirer, Roxanne Carter, Janice Bowie, Muhiuddin Haider, Jimmie Slade, Min Qi Wang
S76 Reduction in hospital utilization by underserved patients through use of a community-medical home
Andrew Masica, Gerald Ogola, Candice Berryman, Kathleen Richter
S77 Sustainability of evidence-based lay health advisor programs in African American communities: A mixed methods investigation of the National Witness Project
Rachel Shelton, Lina Jandorf, Deborah Erwin
S78 Predicting the long-term uninsured population and analyzing their gaps in physical access to healthcare in South Carolina
Khoa Truong
S79 Using an evidence-based parenting intervention in churches to prevent behavioral problems among Filipino youth: A randomized pilot study
Joyce R. Javier, Dean Coffey, Sheree M. Schrager, Lawrence Palinkas, Jeanne Miranda
S80 Sustainability of elementary school-based health centers in three health-disparate southern communities
Veda Johnson, Valerie Hutcherson, Ruth Ellis
S81 Childhood obesity prevention partnership in Louisville: creative opportunities to engage families in a multifaceted approach to obesity prevention
Anna Kharmats, Sandra Marshall-King, Monica LaPradd, Fannie Fonseca-Becker
S82 Improvements in cervical cancer prevention found after implementation of evidence-based Latina prevention care management program
Deanna Kepka, Julia Bodson, Echo Warner, Brynn Fowler
S83 The OneFlorida data trust: Achieving health equity through research & training capacity building
Elizabeth Shenkman, William Hogan, Folakami Odedina, Jessica De Leon, Monica Hooper, Olveen Carrasquillo, Renee Reams, Myra Hurt, Steven Smith, Jose Szapocznik, David Nelson, Prabir Mandal
S84 Disseminating and sustaining medical-legal partnerships: Shared value and social return on investment
James Teufel
doi:10.1186/s13012-016-0452-0
PMCID: PMC4977475  PMID: 27490260
19.  Risk Prediction for Breast, Endometrial, and Ovarian Cancer in White Women Aged 50 y or Older: Derivation and Validation from Population-Based Cohort Studies 
PLoS Medicine  2013;10(7):e1001492.
Ruth Pfeiffer and colleagues describe models to calculate absolute risks for breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers for white, non-Hispanic women over 50 years old using easily obtainable risk factors.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Background
Breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers share some hormonal and epidemiologic risk factors. While several models predict absolute risk of breast cancer, there are few models for ovarian cancer in the general population, and none for endometrial cancer.
Methods and Findings
Using data on white, non-Hispanic women aged 50+ y from two large population-based cohorts (the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial [PLCO] and the National Institutes of Health–AARP Diet and Health Study [NIH-AARP]), we estimated relative and attributable risks and combined them with age-specific US-population incidence and competing mortality rates. All models included parity. The breast cancer model additionally included estrogen and progestin menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use, other MHT use, age at first live birth, menopausal status, age at menopause, family history of breast or ovarian cancer, benign breast disease/biopsies, alcohol consumption, and body mass index (BMI); the endometrial model included menopausal status, age at menopause, BMI, smoking, oral contraceptive use, MHT use, and an interaction term between BMI and MHT use; the ovarian model included oral contraceptive use, MHT use, and family history or breast or ovarian cancer. In independent validation data (Nurses' Health Study cohort) the breast and ovarian cancer models were well calibrated; expected to observed cancer ratios were 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96–1.04) for breast cancer and 1.08 (95% CI: 0.97–1.19) for ovarian cancer. The number of endometrial cancers was significantly overestimated, expected/observed = 1.20 (95% CI: 1.11–1.29). The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs; discriminatory power) were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.57–0.59), 0.59 (95% CI: 0.56–0.63), and 0.68 (95% CI: 0.66–0.70) for the breast, ovarian, and endometrial models, respectively.
Conclusions
These models predict absolute risks for breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers from easily obtainable risk factors and may assist in clinical decision-making. Limitations are the modest discriminatory ability of the breast and ovarian models and that these models may not generalize to women of other races.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Editors' Summary
Background
In 2008, just three types of cancer accounted for 10% of global cancer-related deaths. That year, about 460,000 women died from breast cancer (the most frequently diagnosed cancer among women and the fifth most common cause of cancer-related death). Another 140,000 women died from ovarian cancer, and 74,000 died from endometrial (womb) cancer (the 14th and 20th most common causes of cancer-related death, respectively). Although these three cancers originate in different tissues, they nevertheless share many risk factors. For example, current age, age at menarche (first period), and parity (the number of children a woman has had) are all strongly associated with breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer risk. Because these cancers share many hormonal and epidemiological risk factors, a woman with a high breast cancer risk is also likely to have an above-average risk of developing ovarian or endometrial cancer.
Why Was This Study Done?
Several statistical models (for example, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool) have been developed that estimate a woman's absolute risk (probability) of developing breast cancer over the next few years or over her lifetime. Absolute risk prediction models are useful in the design of cancer prevention trials and can also help women make informed decisions about cancer prevention and treatment options. For example, a woman at high risk of breast cancer might decide to take tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention, but ideally she needs to know her absolute endometrial cancer risk before doing so because tamoxifen increases the risk of this cancer. Similarly, knowledge of her ovarian cancer risk might influence a woman's decision regarding prophylactic removal of her ovaries to reduce her breast cancer risk. There are few absolute risk prediction models for ovarian cancer, and none for endometrial cancer, so here the researchers develop models to predict the risk of these cancers and of breast cancer.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
Absolute risk prediction models are constructed by combining estimates for risk factors from cohorts with population-based incidence rates from cancer registries. Models are validated in an independent cohort by testing their ability to identify people with the disease in an independent cohort and their ability to predict the observed numbers of incident cases. The researchers used data on white, non-Hispanic women aged 50 years or older that were collected during two large prospective US cohort studies of cancer screening and of diet and health, and US cancer incidence and mortality rates provided by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program to build their models. The models all included parity as a risk factor, as well as other factors. The model for endometrial cancer, for example, also included menopausal status, age at menopause, body mass index (an indicator of the amount of body fat), oral contraceptive use, menopausal hormone therapy use, and an interaction term between menopausal hormone therapy use and body mass index. Individual women's risk for endometrial cancer calculated using this model ranged from 1.22% to 17.8% over the next 20 years depending on their exposure to various risk factors. Validation of the models using data from the US Nurses' Health Study indicated that the endometrial cancer model overestimated the risk of endometrial cancer but that the breast and ovarian cancer models were well calibrated—the predicted and observed risks for these cancers in the validation cohort agreed closely. Finally, the discriminatory power of the models (a measure of how well a model separates people who have a disease from people who do not have the disease) was modest for the breast and ovarian cancer models but somewhat better for the endometrial cancer model.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings show that breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer can all be predicted using information on known risk factors for these cancers that is easily obtainable. Because these models were constructed and validated using data from white, non-Hispanic women aged 50 years or older, they may not accurately predict absolute risk for these cancers for women of other races or ethnicities. Moreover, the modest discriminatory power of the breast and ovarian cancer models means they cannot be used to decide which women should be routinely screened for these cancers. Importantly, however, these well-calibrated models should provide realistic information about an individual's risk of developing breast, ovarian, or endometrial cancer that can be used in clinical decision-making and that may assist in the identification of potential participants for research studies.
Additional Information
Please access these websites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001492.
This study is further discussed in a PLOS Medicine Perspective by Lars Holmberg and Andrew Vickers
The US National Cancer Institute provides comprehensive information about cancer (in English and Spanish), including detailed information about breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer;
Information on the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool, the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program, and on the prospective cohort study of screening and the diet and health study that provided the data used to build the models is also available on the NCI site
Cancer Research UK, a not-for-profit organization, provides information about cancer, including detailed information on breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer
The UK National Health Service Choices website has information and personal stories about breast cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometrial cancer; the not-for-profit organization Healthtalkonline also provides personal stories about dealing with breast cancer and ovarian cancer
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001492
PMCID: PMC3728034  PMID: 23935463
20.  Polymorphic repeat in AIB1 does not alter breast cancer risk 
Breast Cancer Research : BCR  2000;2(5):378-385.
We assessed the association between a glutamine repeat polymorphism in AIB1 and breast cancer risk in a case-control study (464 cases, 624 controls) nested within the Nurses' Health Study cohort. We observed no association between AIB1 genotype and breast cancer incidence, or specific tumor characteristics. These findings suggest that AIB1 repeat genotype does not influence postmenopausal breast cancer risk among Caucasian women in the general population.
Introduction:
A causal association between endogenous and exogenous estrogens and breast cancer has been established. Steroid hormones regulate the expression of proteins that are involved in breast cell proliferation and development after binding to their respective steroid hormone receptors. Coactivator and corepressor proteins have recently been identified that interact with steroid hormone receptors and modulate transcriptional activation [1]. AIB1 (amplified in breast 1) is a member of the steroid receptor coactivator (SRC) family that interacts with estrogen receptor (ER)α in a ligand-dependent manner, and increases estrogen-dependent transcription [2]. Amplification and overexpression of AIB1 has been observed in breast and ovarian cancer cell lines and in breast tumors [2,3]. A polymorphic stretch of glutamine amino acids, with unknown biologic function, has recently been described in the carboxyl-terminal region of AIB1 [4]. Among women with germline BRCA1 mutations, significant positive associations were observed between AIB1 alleles with 26 or fewer glutamine repeats and breast cancer risk [5]
Aim:
To establish whether AIB1 repeat alleles are associated with breast cancer risk and specific tumor characteristics among Caucasian women.
Patients and methods:
We evaluated associations prospectively between AIB1 alleles and breast cancer risk in the Nurses' Health Study using a nested case-control design. The Nurses' Health Study was initiated in 1976, when 121 700 US-registered nurses between the ages of 30 and 55 years returned an initial questionnaire reporting medical histories and baseline health-related exposures. Between 1989 and 1990 blood samples were collected from 32 826 women. Eligible cases in this study consisted of women with pathologically confirmed incident breast cancer from the subcohort who gave a blood specimen. Cases with a diagnosis anytime after blood collection up to June 1, 1994, with no previously diagnosed cancer except for nonmelanoma skin cancer were included. Controls were randomly selected participants who gave a blood sample and were free of diagnosed cancer (except nonmelanoma skin cancer) up to and including the interval in which the cases were diagnosed, and were matched to cases on year of birth, menopausal status, postmenopausal hormone use, and time of day, month and fasting status at blood sampling. The nested case-control study consisted of 464 incident breast cancer cases and 624 matched controls. The protocol was approved by the Committee on Human Subjects, Brigham and Womens' Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts USA. Information regarding breast cancer risk factors was obtained from the 1976 baseline questionnaire, subsequent biennial questionnaires, and a questionnaire that was completed at the time of blood sampling. Histopathologic characteristics, such as stage, tumor size and ER and progesterone receptor (PR) status, were ascertained from medical records when available and used in case subgroup analyses.
AIB1 repeat alleles were determined by automated fluorescence-based fragment detection from polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-amplified DNA extracted from peripheral blood lymphocytes. Fluorescent 5' -labeled primers were utilized for PCR amplification, and glutamine repeat number discrimination was performed using the ABI Prism 377 DNA Sequencer (Perkin-Elmer, Foster City, CA, USA). Genotyping was performed by laboratory personnel who were blinded to case-control status, and blinded quality control samples were inserted to validate genotyping identification procedures (n = 110); concordance for the blinded samples was 100%. Methods regarding plasma hormone assays have previously been reported [6]. Conditional and unconditional logistic regression models, including terms for the matching variables and other potential confounders, were used to assess the association of AIB1 alleles and breast cancer characterized by histologic subtype, stage of disease, and ER and PR status. We also evaluated whether breast cancer risk associated with AIB1 genotype differed within strata of established breast cancer risk factors, and whether repeat length in AIB1 indirectly influenced plasma hormone levels.
Results:
The case-control comparisons of established breast cancer risk factors among these women have previously been reported [7], and are generally consistent with expectation. The mean age of the women was 58.3 (standard deviation [SD] 7.1) years, ranging from 43 to 69 years at blood sampling. There were 188 premenopausal and 810 postmenopausal women, with mean ages of 48.1 (SD 2.8) years and 61.4 (SD 5.0) years, respectively, at blood sampling. Women in this study were primarily white; Asians, African-Americans and Hispanics comprised less than 1% of cases or controls.
The distribution of AIB1 glutamine repeat alleles and AIB1 genotypes for cases and controls are presented in Table 1. Women with AIB1 alleles of 26 glutamine repeats or fewer were not at increased risk for breast cancer (odds ratio [OR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75-1.36; Table 2). Results were also similar by menopausal status and in analyses additionally adjusting for established breast cancer risk factors. Among premenopausal women, the OR for women with at least one allele with 26 glutamine repeats or fewer was 0.82 (95% Cl 0.37-1.81), and among postmenopausal women the OR was 1.09 (95% Cl 0.78-1.52; Table 2). We did not observe evidence of a positive association between shorter repeat length and advanced breast cancer, defined as women with breast cancer having one or more involved nodes (OR 1.07, 95% Cl 0.64-1.78), or with cancers with a hormone-dependent phenotype (ER-positive: OR 1.16, 95% Cl 0.81-1.65; Table 3). No associations were observed among women who had one or more alleles with 26 glutamine repeats or fewer, with or without a family history of breast cancer (family history: OR 1.09; 95% Cl 0.46-2.58; no family history: OR 0.94; 95% Cl 0.68-1.31; test for interaction P = 0.65). We also did not observe associations with breast cancer risk to be modified by other established breast cancer risk factors. Among postmenopausal controls not using postmenopausal hormones, geometric least-squared mean plasma levels of estrone sulfate and estrone were similar among carriers and noncarriers of AIB1 alleles with 26 glutamine repeats or fewer (both differences: ≤ +3.5%; P >0.50). Mean levels of estradiol were slightly, but nonsignificantly elevated among carriers of alleles with 26 glutamine repeats or fewer (+11.6%; P = 0.08).
Discussion:
In this population-based nested case-control study, women with at most 26 repeating glutamine codons (CAG/CAA) within the carboxyl terminus of AIB1 were not at increased risk for breast cancer. We did not observe shorter repeat alleles to be positively associated with breast cancer grouped by histologic subtype, stage of disease, or by ER and PR status. These data suggest that AIB1 repeat length is not a strong independent risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer, and does not modify the clinical presentation of the tumor among Caucasian women in the general population.
PMCID: PMC13920  PMID: 11056690
AIB1 polymorphism; breast cancer; genetic susceptibility; molecular epidemiology
21.  Are there racial/ethnic disparities among women younger than 40 undergoing mammography? 
While the probability of a woman developing invasive breast cancer at age <40 is low (<1%), mammography use reported among younger women (age <40) is substantial, and varies by race/ethnicity. Little detail is known about mammography use among women aged <40, particularly by race/ethnicity. We describe racial/ethnic differences in: (1) mammography indication after considering underlying risk factors (breast symptoms and family history); (2) follow-up recommendations, and (3) mammography outcomes for first mammograms in women aged <40. These 1996–2005 Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium data are prospectively pooled from seven U.S. mammography registries. Our community-based sample included 99,615 women aged 18–39 who self-reported race/ethnicity and presented for a first mammogram (screening or diagnostic) with no history of breast cancer. Multivariable analyses controlled for registry site, age, family history of breast cancer, symptoms, and exam year. Overall, 73.6% of the women in our sample were seen for a screening mammogram. Following screening mammography, African American (AA) women were more likely than white women to be recommended for additional workup [relative risk (RR): 1.15 (95% CI: 1.07–1.23)]. Following diagnostic mammography, AA [RR: 1.30 (95% CI: 1.17–1.44)] and Asian [RR: 1.44 (95% CI: 1.26–1.64)] women were more likely to be recommended for biopsy, fine-needle aspiration, or surgical consultation. Depending on race/ethnicity, and considering the rate of true positive to total first screening mammograms of younger women, a women has a likelihood of a true positive of 1 in 363–1,122; she has a likelihood of a false positive of 1 in 7–10. This study of community-based practice found racial/ethnic variability in mammography indication, recommendations, and outcomes among women undergoing first mammography before 40. These findings highlight important areas for future research to understand the motivating factors for these practice patterns and the implications of early mammography use.
doi:10.1007/s10549-010-0812-4
PMCID: PMC2927744  PMID: 20204501
Mammography; Breast neoplasms; Risk factors; Health services accessibility; Healthcare disparities
22.  ‘If I feel something wrong, then I will get a mammogram’: understanding barriers and facilitators for mammography screening among Chilean women 
Family Practice  2009;27(1):85-92.
Background. Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer among women in Chile and in many Latin American countries. Breast cancer screening is an effective strategy to reduce mortality, but it has a very low compliance among Chilean women.
Objective. To understand barriers and facilitators for breast cancer screening in a group of Chilean women aged 50–70.
Methods. Following the Predisposing, Enabling and Reinforcing (PRECEDE) framework, seven focus groups (N = 48 women) were conducted with women that have had diverse experiences with breast cancer and screening practices. Information was collected using field notes and audio and video recording. Following the grounded theory model, a sequential process of open, axial and selective coding was used for the information analysis. Atlas ti 5.5 software was used for coding and segmenting the data obtained from the interviews.
Results. The presence of symptoms and/or the finding of lumps through breast self-examination (BSE) were the main predisposing factors for getting a mammogram. Secrecy, embarrassment and fatalism about breast cancer were significant cultural factors that influenced the decision to seek mammogram screening. Confidence in medical staff and dignity in the treatment at the clinic were important enabling factors. The main reinforcing factors for getting the test were a sense of fulfilment by doing something good for themselves and getting timely information about the results.
Conclusions. Primary health care providers should use culturally appropriate strategies to better inform women about the importance of mammography screening and the limitations of BSE for preventing advanced breast cancer.
doi:10.1093/fampra/cmp080
PMCID: PMC2860714  PMID: 19897514
Breast cancer; Chile; qualitative evaluation; screening
23.  DEAR1 Is a Dominant Regulator of Acinar Morphogenesis and an Independent Predictor of Local Recurrence-Free Survival in Early-Onset Breast Cancer 
PLoS Medicine  2009;6(5):e1000068.
Ann Killary and colleagues describe a new gene that is genetically altered in breast tumors, and that may provide a new breast cancer prognostic marker.
Background
Breast cancer in young women tends to have a natural history of aggressive disease for which rates of recurrence are higher than in breast cancers detected later in life. Little is known about the genetic pathways that underlie early-onset breast cancer. Here we report the discovery of DEAR1 (ductal epithelium–associated RING Chromosome 1), a novel gene encoding a member of the TRIM (tripartite motif) subfamily of RING finger proteins, and provide evidence for its role as a dominant regulator of acinar morphogenesis in the mammary gland and as an independent predictor of local recurrence-free survival in early-onset breast cancer.
Methods and Findings
Suppression subtractive hybridization identified DEAR1 as a novel gene mapping to a region of high-frequency loss of heterozygosity (LOH) in a number of histologically diverse human cancers within Chromosome 1p35.1. In the breast epithelium, DEAR1 expression is limited to the ductal and glandular epithelium and is down-regulated in transition to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), an early histologic stage in breast tumorigenesis. DEAR1 missense mutations and homozygous deletion (HD) were discovered in breast cancer cell lines and tumor samples. Introduction of the DEAR1 wild type and not the missense mutant alleles to complement a mutation in a breast cancer cell line, derived from a 36-year-old female with invasive breast cancer, initiated acinar morphogenesis in three-dimensional (3D) basement membrane culture and restored tissue architecture reminiscent of normal acinar structures in the mammary gland in vivo. Stable knockdown of DEAR1 in immortalized human mammary epithelial cells (HMECs) recapitulated the growth in 3D culture of breast cancer cell lines containing mutated DEAR1, in that shDEAR1 clones demonstrated disruption of tissue architecture, loss of apical basal polarity, diffuse apoptosis, and failure of lumen formation. Furthermore, immunohistochemical staining of a tissue microarray from a cohort of 123 young female breast cancer patients with a 20-year follow-up indicated that in early-onset breast cancer, DEAR1 expression serves as an independent predictor of local recurrence-free survival and correlates significantly with strong family history of breast cancer and the triple-negative phenotype (ER−, PR−, HER-2−) of breast cancers with poor prognosis.
Conclusions
Our data provide compelling evidence for the genetic alteration and loss of expression of DEAR1 in breast cancer, for the functional role of DEAR1 in the dominant regulation of acinar morphogenesis in 3D culture, and for the potential utility of an immunohistochemical assay for DEAR1 expression as an independent prognostic marker for stratification of early-onset disease.
Editors' Summary
Background
Each year, more than one million women discover that they have breast cancer. This type of cancer begins when cells in the breast that line the milk-producing glands or the tubes that take the milk to the nipples (glandular and ductal epithelial cells, respectively) acquire genetic changes that allow them to grow uncontrollably and to move around the body (metastasize). The uncontrolled division leads to the formation of a lump that can be detected by mammography (a breast X-ray) or by manual breast examination. Breast cancer is treated by surgical removal of the lump or, if the cancer has started to spread, by removal of the whole breast (mastectomy). Surgery is usually followed by radiotherapy or chemotherapy. These “adjuvant” therapies are designed to kill any remaining cancer cells but can make patients very ill. Generally speaking, the outlook for women with breast cancer is good. In the US, for example, nearly 90% of affected women are still alive five years after their diagnosis.
Why Was This Study Done?
Although breast cancer is usually diagnosed in women in their 50s or 60s, some women develop breast cancer much earlier. In these women, the disease is often very aggressive. Compared to older women, young women with breast cancer have a lower overall survival rate and their cancer is more likely to recur locally or to metastasize. It would be useful to be able to recognize those younger women at the greatest risk of cancer recurrence so that they could be offered intensive surveillance and adjuvant therapy; those women at a lower risk could have gentler treatments. To achieve this type of “stratification,” the genetic changes that underlie breast cancer in young women need to be identified. In this study, the researchers discover a gene that is genetically altered (by mutations or deletion) in early-onset breast cancer and then investigate whether its expression can predict outcomes in women with this disease.
What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
The researchers used “suppression subtractive hybridization” to identify a new gene in a region of human Chromosome 1 where loss of heterozygosity (LOH; a genetic alteration associated with cancer development) frequently occurs. They called the gene DEAR1 (ductal epithelium-associated RING Chromosome 1) to indicate that it is expressed in ductal and glandular epithelial cells and encodes a “RING finger” protein (specifically, a subtype called a TRIM protein; RING finger proteins such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 have been implicated in early cancer development and in a large fraction of inherited breast cancers). DEAR1 expression was reduced or lost in several ductal carcinomas in situ (a local abnormality that can develop into breast cancer) and advanced breast cancers, the researchers report. Furthermore, many breast tumors carried DEAR1 missense mutations (genetic changes that interfere with the normal function of the DEAR1 protein) or had lost both copies of DEAR1 (the human genome contains two copies of most genes). To determine the function of DEAR1, the researchers replaced a normal copy of DEAR1 into a breast cancer cell that had a mutation in DEAR1. They then examined the growth of these genetically manipulated cells in special three-dimensional cultures. The breast cancer cells without DEAR1 grew rapidly without an organized structure while the breast cancer cells containing the introduced copy of DEAR1 formed structures that resembled normal breast acini (sac-like structures that secrete milk). In normal human mammary epithelial cells, the researchers silenced DEAR1 expression and also showed that without DEAR1, the normal mammary cells lost their ability to form proper acini. Finally, the researchers report that DEAR1 expression (detected “immunohistochemically”) was frequently lost in women who had had early-onset breast cancer and that the loss of DEAR1 expression correlated with reduced local recurrence-free survival, a strong family history of breast cancer and with a breast cancer subtype that has a poor outcome.
What Do These Findings Mean?
These findings indicate that genetic alteration and loss of expression of DEAR1 are common in breast cancer. Although laboratory experiments may not necessarily reflect what happens in people, the results from the three-dimensional culture of breast epithelial cells suggest that DEAR1 may regulate the normal acinar structure of the breast. Consequently, loss of DEAR1 expression could be an early event in breast cancer development. Most importantly, the correlation between DEAR1 expression and both local recurrence in early-onset breast cancer and a breast cancer subtype with a poor outcome suggests that it might be possible to use DEAR1 expression to identify women with early-onset breast cancer who have an increased risk of local recurrence so that they get the most appropriate treatment for their cancer.
Additional Information
Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000068.
This study is further discussed in a PLoS Medicine Perspective by Senthil Muthuswamy
The US National Cancer Institute provides detailed information for patients and health professionals on all aspects of breast cancer, including information on genetic alterations in breast cancer (in English and Spanish)
The MedlinePlus Encyclopedia provides information for patients about breast cancer; MedlinePlus also provides links to many other breast cancer resources (in English and Spanish)
The UK charities Cancerbackup (now merged with MacMillan Cancer Support) and Cancer Research UK also provide detailed information about breast cancer
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000068
PMCID: PMC2673042  PMID: 19536326
24.  What factors explain disparities in mammography rates among Asian American immigrant women? A population-based study in California 
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this study was to compare rates of screening mammography among immigrant women in five Asian American ethnic groups in California, and ascertain the extent to which differences in mammography rates among these groups are attributable to differences in known correlates of cancer screening.
METHODS
Using 2009 data from the California Health Interview Survey, we compared the rates of mammography among Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese immigrants 40 years and older. To assess the impact of Asian ethnicity on participation in screening, we performed multiple logistic regression analysis with models that progressively adjusted for acculturation, socio-demographic characteristics, access to health care and breast cancer risk factors, and examined the predicted probabilities of screening after adjusting for these factors.
FINDINGS
Participation in screening mammography differed according to ethnicity, with Filipina and Vietnamese Americans having the highest rates and Korean Americans having the lowest rates of lifetime and recent (past two years) screening. These differences decreased substantially after adjusting for acculturation, socio-demographic factors and risk factors of breast cancer but differences still remained, most notably for Korean Americans, who continued to have the lowest predicted probability of screening even after adjustment for these factors.
CONCLUSIONS
This analysis draws attention to low mammography screening rates among Asian American immigrants, especially recent immigrants who lack health insurance. Given that their breast cancer incidence is rising with length of stay in the United States, it is very important to increase regular mammography screening in these groups.
doi:10.1016/j.whi.2013.08.005
PMCID: PMC3833860  PMID: 24183415
25.  Health literacy and meeting breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines among Asians and whites in California 
SpringerPlus  2015;4:432.
Objectives
Empirical evidence regarding cancer screening and health literacy is mixed. Cancer is the leading cause of death in Asian Americans, yet screening rates are notably low. Using a population-based sample, we determined if health literacy: (1) was associated with breast and cervical cancer screening, and (2) helped to explain Asian cancer screening disparities.
Methods
We analyzed the 2007 California Health Interview Survey for Asian (Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Korean, Vietnamese, other Asian) and white women within age groups relevant to US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) screening guidelines: cervical: ages 21–65 (n = 15,210) and breast: ages 50–74 (n = 11,163). Multilevel logistic regression models predicted meeting USPSTF screening guidelines both with and without self-reported health literacy controlling for individual-level and contextual-level factors.
Results
Low health literacy significantly (p < 0.05) predicted lower cancer screening in final models for both cancer types. In unadjusted models, Asians were significantly less likely than whites to receive both screening types and significantly more likely to report low health literacy. However, in multivariable models, the addition of the low health literacy variable did not diminish Asian vs. white cancer screening disparities.
Conclusions
Self-reported health literacy predicted cervical and breast cancer screening, but was not able to explain Asian cancer screening disparities. We provide new evidence to support a relationship between health literacy and cancer screening. Health literacy is likely a useful focus for interventions to improve cancer screening and ultimately reduce the burden of cancer. To specifically reduce Asian cancer disparities, additional areas of focus should be considered.
doi:10.1186/s40064-015-1225-y
PMCID: PMC4540711  PMID: 26306294
Asian American; Cancer screening; Health literacy

Results 1-25 (1770331)