International journal of cancer prevention最新文献

INTRODUCTION: Population-based surveys are used to assess colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates, but may be subject to self-report biases. Clinical data from electronic health records (EHR) are another data source for assessing screening rates and self-report bias; however, use of EHR data for population research is relatively new. We sought to compare CRC screening rates from a self-report survey, the 2007 California Health Interview Survey (CHIS), to EHR data from Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF), a multi-specialty healthcare organization serving three counties in California. METHODS: Ever- and up-to-date CRC screening rates were compared between CHIS respondents (N=18,748) and PAMF patients (N=26,283). Both samples were limited to English proficient subjects aged 51-75 with health insurance and a physician visit in the past two years. PAMF rates were age-sex standardized to the CHIS population. Analyses were stratified by racial/ethnic group. RESULTS: EHR data included PAMF internally completed tests (84%), and patient-reported externally completed tests which were either confirmed (7%) or unconfirmed (9%) by a physician. When excluding unconfirmed tests, PAMF screening rates were 6-14 percentage points lower than CHIS rates, for both ever- and up-to-date CRC screening among Non-Hispanic White, Black, Hispanic/Latino, Chinese, Filipino and Japanese subjects. When including unconfirmed tests, differences in screening rates between the two data sets were minimal. CONCLUSION: Comparability of CRC screening rates from survey data and clinic-based EHR data depends on whether or not unconfirmed patient-reported tests in EHR are included. This indicates a need for validated methods of calculating CRC screening rates in EHR data.

Objectives: Patient and provider preferences toward CT colonography (CTC) remain unclear. The primary goals of this study were 1) to investigate patient preferences for one of the currently recommended CRC screening modalities and 2) to evaluate provider preferences before and after review of updated guidelines.

Methods: Cross-sectional survey of ambulatory-care patients and providers in the primary care setting. Providers were surveyed before and after reviewing the 2008 guidelines by the American Cancer Society, US Multisociety Task Force on Colorectal Cancer and the American College of Radiology.

Results: Of 100 patients surveyed, 59% preferred colonoscopy, 17% fecal occult blood testing (FOBT), 14% stool DNA (sDNA) testing, and 10% CTC (P <0.001). The majority of those whose first choice was a stool-based test chose the alternate stool-based test as their second choice over CTC or colonoscopy (P<0.0001). Patients who preferred colonoscopy chose accuracy (76%) and frequency of testing (10%) as the most important test features, whereas patients who preferred a stool-based test chose discomfort (52%) and complications (23%). Of 170 providers surveyed, 96% chose colonoscopy, 2% FOBT, and 1% FOBT with flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) (p < 0.0001). No providers chose CTC or sDNA as their preferred option before reviewing guidelines, and 89% kept their preference after review of guidelines. As a default option for patients who declined colonoscopy, 44% of providers chose FOBT, 12% FOBT+FS, 4% CTC, and 37% deferred to patient preference before review of guidelines. Of the 33% of providers who changed their preference after review of guidelines, 46% recommended CTC. Accuracy was the most influential reason for provider test choice.

Conclusions: Patients and providers prefer colonoscopy for CRC screening. Revised guidelines endorsing the use of CTC are unlikely to change provider preferences but may influence choice of default strategies for patients who decline colonoscopy.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to examine the association between access to mammography facilities and utilization of screening mammography in an urban population. METHODS: Data on female breast cancer cases were obtained from an extensive mammography surveillance project. Distance to mammography facilities was measured by using GIS, which was followed by measuring geographical access to mammography facilities using Floating Catchment Area (FCA) method (considering all available facilities within an arbitrary radius from the woman's residence by using Arc GIS 9.0 software). RESULTS: Of 2,024 women, 91.4% were Caucasian; age ranged from 25 to 98 years; most (95%) were non-Hispanic in origin. Logistic regression found age, family history, hormone replacement therapy, physician recommendation, and breast cancer stage at diagnosis to be significant predictors of having had a previous mammogram. Women having higher access to mammography facilities were less likely to have had a previous mammogram compared to women who had low access, considering all the facilities within 10 miles (OR=0.41, CI=0.22-0.76), 30 miles (OR=0.52, CI=0.29-0.91) and 40 miles (OR=0.51, CI=0.28-0.92) radiuses. CONCLUSIONS: Physical distance to mammography facilities does not necessarily predict utilization of mammogram and greater access does not assure greater utilizations, due to constraints imposed by socio economic and cultural barriers. Future studies should focus on measuring access to mammography facilities capturing a broader dimension of access considering qualitative aspect of facilities, as well as other travel impedances.

We performed this study to assess women's perceptions, knowledge and behavioral practices for breast cancer prevention in a rural setting. A 61-item questionnaire was developed based on Health Belief Model constructs and completed by 185 women age 35 and older. Results showed significant differences in several areas including perceived susceptibility and severity. Overall knowledge was poor. In logistic regression perceived barriers and yearly clinical breast examination appeared to be significant predictors for regular screening behavior (OR=0.02, CI=0.03-0.09 and OR=0.23, CI=0.05-0.99, respectively). Behavioral interventions targeting barriers for rural women need to be designed to include consideration of specific barriers and clear information on the need for regular screening.

N-Nitrosamines are a large group of chemical compounds that are carcinogenic in animals, and probably in humans. These compounds form DNA adducts, namely 7-methyl-deoxyguanosine monophosphate (7-methyl-dGp) and 7-ethyl-deoxyguanosine monophosphate (7-ethyl-dGp). In study, we have used a combined two-step HPLC and (32)P-postlabeling assay to measure these adducts in the lung tissues of 88 autopsy donors. The mean levels for 7-methyl-dGp and 7-ethyl-dGp were 2.1 ± 0.9 (range 0.4 - 5.3) and 0.9 ± 0.5 (range = 0.1-3.0) adducts per 10(7) dGp. Normal distributions of adduct levels were found. The mean ratio for 7-methyl-dGp to 7-ethyl-dGp was 2.8 (S.D. = 2.3), and the levels were highly correlated (R=0.22, P=0.048). However, this was mostly attributed to nonsmokers. Examinations of adduct levels by race revealed no association with either of adducts studied (P=0.3 and P=0.7 for 7-methyl-dGp and 7-ethyl-dGp, respectively), serum cotinine (P=0.4) or ethanol (P=0.7). Overall, there was no association with smoking status, although there was a borderline correlation of the 7-ethyl-dGp adducts (P=0.09) among men, and for 7-methyl-2'-deoxyguanosine (P=0.03) among women. Women smokers showed higher 7-ethyl-dGp levels than men (P=0.03), and African American smokers had more 7-methyl-dGp levels that Caucasians (P=0.08). This study demonstrates that 7-ethyl-dGp adducts are lower than 7-methyl-dgP adducts in both smokers and non-smokers, but that they were only correlated in nonsmokers. Thus, there is a wide interindividual variation in adduct levels, likely due to differences in N-nitrosamine metabolism, which widens at higher levels of exposure. The presence of lower 7-ethyl-dGp levels in human tissues is consistent with experimental animal studies, yet ethylating N-nitrosamines are more potent than those that cause methylation. Although this study is limited by a small number of study subjects, the findings of higher adduct levels in women and African-American smokers are consistent with the reported increased risk and/or incidence of lung cancer in these groups.