Search Results (15)

Cervical cancer remains one of the main causes of female mortality, especially in middle- and low-income countries, despite efforts towards the implementation of global vaccination against human papillomavirus (HPV). The aim of this study was to review and compare the most recently published international guidelines providing recommendations on cervical cancer screening strategies among average and high-risk women. Thus, a comparative review of guidelines by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the American Cancer Society (ACS), the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC), the Cancer Council Australia (CCA), and the European Guidelines (EG) was conducted. There is an overall agreement regarding the suggestions made for women younger than 21 and those older than 65, with all guidelines stating against routine screening, with the exceptions of CTFPHC and CCA that expand the age group to up to 70 and 75 years, respectively. Continuation of screening in older women is also suggested in those with a history of a precancerous lesion and those with inadequate screening. Most guidelines recommend routine screening at 30–65 years, while the WHO advises that screening should be prioritized at 30–49 years. HPV DNA testing is the method of choice recommended by most guidelines, followed by cytology as an alternative, except for CTFPHC, which refers to cytology only, with self-sampling being an acceptable method by most medical societies. Agreements exist regarding recommendations for specific groups, such as women with a history of total hysterectomy for benign reasons, women with a complete vaccination against HPV, individuals from the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer communities and women with multiple sexual partners or early initiation of sexual activity. On the other hand, the age group of 21–29 is addressed differently by the reviewed guidelines, while differentiations also occur in the screening strategies in cases of abnormal screening results, in women with immunodeficiency, those with in utero exposure to diethylstilbestrole and pregnant women. The development of consistent practice protocols for the most appropriate cervical cancer screening programs seems to be of major importance to reduce mortality rates and safely guide everyday clinical practice. Full article

Current lung cancer screening guidelines in the United States fail to identify many individuals at risk of developing the disease. Additionally, existing healthcare infrastructure has been leveraged to establish IPN clinics, a promising approach to addressing the limitations of current screening guidelines. Early-stage lung cancer is frequently diagnosed because of the incidental detection of pulmonary nodules on clinically indicated chest CT scans, particularly in the absence of formal screening programs. While artificial intelligence (AI) systems for lung cancer detection have demonstrated significant advancements in medicine, their clinical validation in screening settings remains limited. This review will discuss the pivotal trials underpinning the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations for lung cancer screening, which have shaped the current guidelines for at-risk populations. We will explore recent studies investigating the role of AI in enhancing lung cancer screening efforts, highlighting how AI has the potential to improve early detection, streamline workflows, and reduce false positives and negatives in screening processes. This review will present the lung cancer screening rates at our institution, with a specific focus on the validation and integration of AI-driven technologies into our established screening programs. Using AI algorithms, we have validated enhanced detection capabilities through retrospective analysis of historical patient data, demonstrating significant improvements in identifying high-risk individuals and early-stage malignancies. These AI models, validated through rigorous cross-validation methods and clinical trials, have proven to outperform traditional screening approaches in sensitivity and specificity. The integration of these AI technologies within the lung cancer screening framework not only optimizes existing programs but also expands access to screening, improving early detection rates and ultimately leading to better patient outcomes. Through continuous validation and refinement, we aim to solidify AI’s role in transforming lung cancer detection and patient care. Through ongoing validation and implementation, AI can play a crucial role in transforming lung cancer screening practices, ultimately contributing to earlier diagnosis and improved patient survival. Full article

Background: The effectiveness of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and non-occupational post-exposure prophylaxis (nPEP) in preventing HIV is well-established, yet their use in clinical practice remains low. Healthcare providers, especially those in primary and emergency care settings, play a crucial role in adopting and implementing these prevention strategies. We conducted a statewide survey with 519 healthcare providers in Texas to assess their knowledge, practices, and barriers related to prescribing PrEP and nPEP. Methods: The survey collected data on demographics, clinical experience, practice type, awareness of recommended guidelines, knowledge of PrEP and nPEP, prescribing practices, and challenges encountered to prescribe these medications. We used multiple regression analysis to identify factors associated with PrEP and nPEP prescribing behavior. Results: While most providers were familiar with CDC and/or USPSTF-recommended PrEP guidelines, fewer had adequate knowledge of nPEP. Key challenges identified by providers included concerns about cost (48%), limited time (40% for PrEP and 51% for nPEP), and insufficient education or training (40% for PrEP and 35% for nPEP). Providers who were more familiar with the recommended guidelines and had greater experience in sexual health assessment were more likely to prescribe both PrEP and nPEP. Conclusions: This study highlights the need for enhanced education and training to boost providers’ knowledge and confidence in prescribing PrEP and nPEP. It also underscores the importance of addressing cost-related barriers and simplifying care processes to better integrate these HIV prevention strategies into primary and emergency care settings. Full article

Introduction: Congruent with most guideline publishers, the Canadian Urological Association (CUA) recommends shared decision-making (SDM) on PSA screening (PSAS) for prostate cancer (PCa) following a discussion of its benefits and harms. However, there are limited data on how the general male population feels about these topics. Methods: A survey was completed by 906 male-identifying participants (age > 18) recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which is a crowdsourcing platform providing minimal compensation. Participants answered questions regarding demographics (15), personal/family history (9), PCa/PSA knowledge (41), and opinions regarding PSAS (45). Results: The median age was 38.2 (SD = 12.0), with 22% reporting a family history of PCa and 20% reporting personally undergoing PSAS. Although most participants had heard of PCa (85%) and that they could be screened for it (81%), they generally did not feel knowledgeable about PCa or PSAS guidelines. Most want to talk to their clinician about PCa and PSAS (74%) and are supportive of SDM (48%) or patient-centered decision-making (25%). In general, participants thought PSAS was still worthwhile, even if it led to additional testing or side effects. Similarly, participants thought higher-risk patients should be screened earlier (p < 0.001). A number of misconceptions were evident in the responses. Conclusions: Men approaching the age of PSAS do not feel knowledgeable about PCa or PSAS and want their clinician to discuss these topics with them. The majority believe in PSAS and would like to undergo this screening following SDM. Clinicians also have a role in correcting common misconceptions about PCa. Full article

Lung cancer mortality rates, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), continue to present a significant global health challenge, and the adoption of lung cancer screening remains limited, often influenced by inequities in access to healthcare. Despite clinical evidence demonstrating the efficacy of annual screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and recommendations from medical organizations including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the national lung cancer screening uptake remains around 5% among eligible individuals. Advancements in the clinical management of NSCLC have recently become more personalized with the implementation of blood-based biomarker testing. Extensive research into tumor-derived cell-free DNA (cfDNA) through fragmentation offers a novel method for improving early lung cancer detection. This review assesses the screening landscape, explores obstacles to lung cancer screening, and discusses how a plasma whole genome fragmentome test (pWGFrag-Lung) can improve lung cancer screening participation and adherence. Full article

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy diagnosed in the female population worldwide and the leading cause of death among perimenopausal women. Screening is essential, since earlier detection in combination with improvements in breast cancer treatment can reduce the associated mortality. The aim of this study was to review and compare the recommendations from published guidelines on breast cancer screening. A total of 14 guidelines on breast cancer screening issued between 2014 and 2022 were identified. A descriptive review of relevant guidelines by the World Health Organization (WHO), the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), the American Cancer Society (ACS), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN), the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS), the American College of Radiology (ACR), the Task Force on Preventive Health Care (CTFPHC), the European Commission Initiative on Breast Cancer (ECIBC), the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) and the Japanese Journal of Clinical Oncology (JJCO) for women both at average and high-risk was carried out. There is a consensus among all the reviewed guidelines that mammography is the gold standard screening modality for average-risk women. For this risk group, most of the guidelines suggest annual or biennial mammographic screening at 40–74 years, while screening should particularly focus at 50–69 years. Most of the guidelines suggest that the age limit to stop screening should be determined based on the women’s health status and life expectancy. For women at high-risk, most guidelines recommend the use of annual mammography or magnetic resonance imaging, while the starting age should be earlier than the average-risk group, depending on the risk factor. There is discrepancy among the recommendations regarding the age at onset of screening in the various high-risk categories. The development of consistent international practice protocols for the most appropriate breast cancer screening programs seems of major importance to reduce mortality rates and safely guide everyday clinical practice. Full article

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States. To combat this predicament, early screening and critically assessing its risk factors remain crucial. The aim of this study was to identify the value of specific factors from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001–2018, as they relate to lung cancer mortality in the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF)-eligible population. A total of 3545 adults who met USPSTF criteria were extracted from 81,595 NHANES participants. The LC Death Risk Assessment Tool was used to calculate the number of deaths per 1000 individuals. The Mann–Whitney U test and one-way ANOVA determined the statistical significance of the factors involved in LC mortality. Male sex, African and Hispanic ethnicity, lower education attainment, and secondhand exposure to cigarette smoke correlated with an increased risk of LC mortality. Additionally, the factor of emotional support from NHANES data was analyzed and did not show any benefit to reducing risk. By identifying individuals at high-risk, preventative measures can be maximized to produce the best possible outcome Full article

Current United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations include routine screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer; however, two out of every three cancer cases occur in other indications, leading to diagnoses in advanced stages of the disease and a higher likelihood of mortality. Blood-based multi-cancer early detection (MCED) tests can impact cancer screening and early detection by monitoring for multiple different cancer types at once, including indications where screening is not performed routinely today. We conducted a survey amongst healthcare providers (HCPs), payers, and patients within the U.S. health system to understand the current utilization of cancer screening tests and the anticipated barriers to widespread adoption of blood-based MCED tests. The results indicated that the community favors the adoption of blood-based MCED tests and that there is broad agreement on the value proposition. Despite this recognition, the survey highlighted that there is limited use today due to the perceived lack of clinical accuracy and utility data, high out-of-pocket patient costs, and lack of payer coverage. To overcome the hurdles for future widespread adoption of blood-based MCED tests, increased investment in data generation, education, and implementation of logistical support for HCPs will be critical. Full article

Background and Objectives: Conflicting guidelines exist for initiating average-risk colorectal cancer screening at the age of 45 years. The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) changed its guidelines in 2021 to recommend initiating screening at 45 years due to an increasing incidence of young-onset colorectal cancer. However, the American College of Physicians (ACP) recently recommended not screening average-risk individuals between 45 and 49 years old. We aim to study the national trends in the incidence of sporadic malignant polyps (SMP) in patients from 20 to 49 years old. Materials and Methods: We analyzed the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000–2017) on patients aged 20–49 years who underwent diagnostic colonoscopy with at least a single malignant sporadic colorectal polyp. Results: Of the 10,742 patients diagnosed with SMP, 42.9% were female. The mean age of incidence was 43.07 years (42.91–43.23, 95% CI). Approximately 50% of malignant polyps were diagnosed between 45 and 49 years of age, followed by 25–30% between 40 and 45. There was an upward trend in malignant polyps, with a decreased incidence of malignant villous adenomas and a rise in malignant adenomas and tubulovillous adenomas. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that almost half of the SMPs under 50 years occurred in individuals under age 45, younger than the current screening threshold recommended by the ACP. There has been an upward trend in malignant polyps in the last two decades. This reflects changes in tumor biology, and necessitates further research and support in the USPSTF guidelines to start screening at the age of 45 years. Full article

Background: Studies have shown lower rates of cancer screening and high mortality rates among all Asian Americans than among non-Hispanic White populations. However, most of these studies often confound diverse Asian American subgroups with limited data on cancer screening for Indian Americans, with this group being particularly interesting because of their counterintuitive socioeconomic status. For this reason, the objective of this study is to evaluate knowledge of the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) cancer screening guidelines and compliance among South Indian Americans residing in Southern California. Methods: This was a cross-sectional study gathering community responses through an electronic survey. The survey reports knowledge of USPSTF screening guidelines and participant compliance rates. Rates were further compared to non-Hispanic White populations from official sources. Results: South Indian Americans residing in California had lower rates of compliance for colorectal, lung, and breast cancer screening when compared to that of non-Hispanic White populations in the same region, with the exception of cervical cancer screening rates. Conclusion: Understanding the cultural characteristics of special populations, such as Indian Americans, can help communities adhere to more effective screening practices that can improve outcomes. Full article

Due to poor compliance and uptake of LDCT screening among high-risk populations, lung cancer is often diagnosed in advanced stages where treatment is rarely curative. Based upon the American College of Radiology’s Lung Imaging and Reporting Data System (Lung-RADS) 80–90% of patients screened will have clinically “non-actionable” nodules (Lung-RADS 1 or 2), and those harboring larger, clinically “actionable” nodules (Lung-RADS 3 or 4) have a significantly greater risk of lung cancer. The development of a companion diagnostic method capable of identifying patients likely to have a clinically actionable nodule identified during LDCT is anticipated to improve accessibility and uptake of the paradigm and improve early detection rates. Using protein microarrays, we identified 501 circulating targets with differential immunoreactivities against cohorts characterized as possessing either actionable (n = 42) or non-actionable (n = 20) solid pulmonary nodules, per Lung-RADS guidelines. Quantitative assays were assembled on the Luminex platform for the 26 most promising targets. These assays were used to measure serum autoantibody levels in 841 patients, consisting of benign (BN; n = 101), early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC; n = 245), other early-stage malignancies within the lung (n = 29), and individuals meeting United States Preventative Screening Task Force (USPSTF) screening inclusion criteria with both actionable (n = 87) and non-actionable radiologic findings (n = 379). These 841 patients were randomly split into three cohorts: Training, Validation 1, and Validation 2. Of the 26 candidate biomarkers tested, 17 differentiated patients with actionable nodules from those with non-actionable nodules. A random forest model consisting of six autoantibody (Annexin 2, DCD, MID1IP1, PNMA1, TAF10, ZNF696) biomarkers was developed to optimize our classification performance; it possessed a positive predictive value (PPV) of 61.4%/61.0% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 95.7%/83.9% against Validation cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. This panel may improve patient selection methods for lung cancer screening, serving to greatly reduce the futile screening rate while also improving accessibility to the paradigm for underserved populations. Full article

Background and Objectives: Early detection through appropriate screening is key to curing breast cancer. The Access to Breast Care for West Texas (ABC4WT) program offers no-cost mammography to underserved women in West Texas. The U.S. Preventative Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines are breast cancer screening guidelines which suggest screening for all women at the age of 50 years. The focus of this study was to identify sociodemographic barriers and determinants for breast cancer screenings, as well as screening outcomes, in low income, uninsured, or under-insured communities in West Texas. Materials and Methods: The ABC4WT program’s patient database was queried from 1 November, 2018, to 1 June, 2021, for sociodemographic variables, screening history, and results to identify high-risk groups for outreach. The American College of Radiology’s risk assessment and quality assurance tool, BI-RADS (Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System), a widely accepted lexicon and reporting schema for breast imaging, was used for risk differentiation. Results: The cancer rate for ABC4WT’s program was significantly higher than the national mean (5.1), at 23.04 per 1000 mammograms. Of the 1519 mammograms performed, women between 40 and 49 years old represented the highest percentages of BI-RADS 4 and 5 (42.0% and 28.0%, respectively; p = 0.049). This age group also received 43.7% of biopsies performed and comprised 28.6% (n = 10) of cancers diagnosed (n = 35) (p = 0.031). Additionally, participants with a monthly household income of less than USD 800/month/person were more likely to result in a cancer diagnosis (70.6%) than higher incomes (29.4%) (p = 0.021). Conclusions: These determinants most starkly impacted women 40–49 years old who would not have been screened by U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) guidelines. This population with increased cancer risk should be encouraged to undergo screening for breast cancer via mammography. Full article

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of the Pooled Cohort Equation (PCE), U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF), and Framingham Risk Score (FRS) models in predicting ASCVD events among patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (HNCA). From a large cohort of HNCA patients treated with RT, ASCVD events were adjudicated. Observed vs. predicted ASCVD events were compared. We compared rates by statin eligibility status. Regression models and survival analysis were used to identify the relationship between predicted risk and post-RT outcomes. Among the 723 identified patients, 274 (38%) were statin-eligible based on USPSTF criteria, 359 (49%) based on PCE, and 234 (32%) based on FRS. During follow-up, 17% developed an ASCVD, with an event rate of 27 per 1000 person-years, 68% higher than predicted (RR 1.68 (95% CI: 1.02, 2.12), p < 0.001). In multivariable regression, there was no difference in event rates by statin eligibility status (p > 0.05). Post-RT, the observed event rate was higher than the predicted ASCVD risk across all grades of predicted risk (p < 0.05) and the observed risk of an ASCVD event was high even among patients predicted to have a low risk of ASCVD. In conclusion, current ASCVD risk calculators significantly underestimate the risk for ASCVD among patients receiving RT for HNCA. Full article

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

Cancer screening is an important way to reduce the burden of cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic created delays in screening with the potential to increase cancer disparities in the United States (U.S.). Data from the 2014–2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey were analyzed to estimate the percentages of adults who reported cancer screening in the last 12 months consistent with the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation for cervical (ages 21–65), breast (ages 50–74), and colorectal cancer (ages 50–75) prior to the pandemic. Cancer screening percentages for 2020 (April–December excluding January–March) were compared to screening percentages for 2014–2019 to begin to look at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Screening percentages for 2020 were decreased from those for 2014–2019 including several underserved racial groups. Decreases in mammography and colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy were higher among American Indian/Alaskan Natives, Hispanics, and multiracial participants, but decreases in pap test were also highest among Hispanics, Whites, Asians, and African-Americans/Blacks. Decreases in mammograms among women ages 40–49 were also seen. As the 2020 comparison is conservative, the 2021 decreases in cancer screening are expected to be much greater and are likely to increase cancer disparities substantially. Full article