Rectal cancer survival in the United States by race and stage, 2001 to 2009: Findings from the CONCORD-2 study.

BACKGROUND: In the first CONCORD study, 5-year survival for patients with diagnosed with rectal cancer between 1990 and 1994 was <60%, with large racial disparities noted in the majority of participating states. We have updated these findings to 2009 by examining population-based survival by stage of disease at the time of diagnosis, race, and calendar period. METHODS: Data from the CONCORD-2 study were used to compare survival among individuals aged 15 to 99 years who were diagnosed in 37 states encompassing up to 80% of the US population. We estimated net survival up to 5 years after diagnosis correcting for background mortality with state-specific and race-specific life table. Survival estimates were age-standardized with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. We present survival estimates by race (all, black, and white) for 2001 through 2003 and 2004 through 2009 to account for changes in collecting the data for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Summary Stage 2000. RESULTS: There was a small increase in 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year net survival between 2001-2003 (84.6%, 70.7%, and 63.2%, respectively), and 2004-2009 (85.1%, 71.5%, and 64.1%, respectively). Black individuals were found to have lower 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival than white individuals in both periods; the absolute difference in survival between black and white individuals declined only for 5-year survival. Black patients had lower 5-year survival than whites at each stage at the time of diagnosis in both time periods. CONCLUSIONS: There was little improvement noted in net survival for patients with rectal cancer, with persistent disparities noted between black and white individuals. Additional investigation is needed to identify and implement effective interventions to ensure the consistent and equitable use of high-quality screening, diagnosis, and treatment to improve survival for patients with rectal cancer. Cancer 2017;123:5037-58. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA

Recent Trends in Prostate Cancer Incidence by Age, Cancer Stage, and Grade, the United States, 2001–2007

Objective. To examine prostate cancer trends by demographic and tumor characteristics because a comprehensive examination of recent prostate cancer incidence rates is lacking. Patients and Methods. We described prostate cancer incidence rates and trends using the 2001–2007 National Program of Cancer Registries and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program data (representing over 93% of US population). Because of coding changes in cancer grade, we restricted analysis to 2004–2007. We conducted descriptive and trend analyses using SEER*Stat. Results. The overall prostate cancer incidence rate was stable from 2001 to 2007; however, rates significantly increased among men aged 40–49 years (APC = 3.0) and decreased among men aged 70–79 years (APC = 2.3), and 80 years or older (APC = −4.4). About 42% of localized prostate cancers diagnosed from 2004 to 2007 were poorly differentiated. The incidence of poorly differentiated cancer significantly increased among localized (APC = 8.0) and regional stage (APC = 6.1) prostate cancers during 2004–2007. Conclusions. The recent trend in prostate cancer incidence was stable but varied dramatically by age. Given the large proportion of poorly differentiated disease among localized prostate cancers and its increasing trend in more recent years, continued monitoring of prostate cancer incidence and trends by demographic and tumor characteristics is warranted

National evidence on the use of shared decision making in prostate-specific antigen screening.

PURPOSE: Recent clinical practice guidelines on prostate cancer screening using the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test (PSA screening) have recommended that clinicians practice shared decision making-a process involving clinician-patient discussion of the pros, cons, and uncertainties of screening. We undertook a study to determine the prevalence of shared decision making in both PSA screening and nonscreening, as well as patient characteristics associated with shared decision making. METHODS: A nationally representative sample of 3,427 men aged 50 to 74 years participating in the 2010 National Health Interview Survey responded to questions on the extent of shared decision making (past physician-patient discussion of advantages, disadvantages, and scientific uncertainty associated with PSA screening), PSA screening intensity (tests in past 5 years), and sociodemographic and health-related characteristics. RESULTS: Nearly two-thirds (64.3%) of men reported no past physician-patient discussion of advantages, disadvantages, or scientific uncertainty (no shared decision making); 27.8% reported discussion of 1 to 2 elements only (partial shared decision making); 8.0% reported discussion of all 3 elements (full shared decision making). Nearly one-half (44.2%) reported no PSA screening, 27.8% reported low-intensity (less-than-annual) screening, and 25.1% reported high-intensity (nearly annual) screening. Absence of shared decision making was more prevalent in men who were not screened; 88% (95% CI, 86.2%-90.1%) of nonscreened men reported no shared decision making compared with 39% (95% CI, 35.0%-43.3%) of men undergoing high-intensity screening. Extent of shared decision making was associated with black race, Hispanic ethnicity, higher education, health insurance, and physician recommendation. Screening intensity was associated with older age, higher education, usual source of medical care, and physician recommendation, as well as with partial vs no or full shared decision making. CONCLUSIONS: Most US men report little shared decision making in PSA screening, and the lack of shared decision making is more prevalent in nonscreened than in screened men. Screening intensity is greatest with partial shared decision making, and different elements of shared decision making are associated with distinct patient characteristics. Shared decision making needs to be improved in decisions for and against PSA screening

Multi-component interventions and change in screening rates in primary care clinics in the Colorectal Cancer Control Program

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening has been shown to decrease CRC mortality. Implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) increases CRC screening. The purpose of this analysis is to determine which combinations of EBIs or strategies led to increases in clinic-level screening rates among clinics participating in CDC's Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP). Data were collected from CRCCP clinics between 2015 and 2018 and the analysis was conducted in 2020. The outcome variable was the annual change in clinic level CRC screening rate in percentage points. We used first difference (FD) estimator of linear panel data regression model to estimate the associations of outcome with independent variables, which include different combinations of EBIs and intervention strategies. The study sample included 486 unique clinics with 1156 clinic years of total observations. The average baseline screening rate was 41&nbsp;% with average annual increase of 4.6 percentage points. Only two out of six combinations of any two EBIs were associated with increases in screening rate (largest was 6.5 percentage points, P&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.001). Any combinations involving three EBIs or all four EBIs were significantly associated with the outcome with largest increase of 7.2 percentage points (P&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.001). All interventions involving 2-3 strategies led to increases in rate with largest increase associated with the combination of increasing community demand and access (6.1 percentage points, P&nbsp;&lt;&nbsp;0.001). Clinics implementing combinations of these EBIs, particularly those including three or more EBIs, often were more likely to have impact on screening rate change than those implementing none

Interobserver agreement for the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT criteria for a UIP pattern on CT.

OBJECTIVES: To establish the level of observer variation for the current ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT criteria for a diagnosis of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) on CT among a large group of thoracic radiologists of varying levels of experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 112 observers (96 of whom were thoracic radiologists) categorised CTs of 150 consecutive patients with fibrotic lung disease using the ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT CT criteria for a UIP pattern (3 categories--UIP, possibly UIP and inconsistent with UIP). The presence of honeycombing, traction bronchiectasis and emphysema was also scored using a 3-point scale (definitely present, possibly present, absent). Observer agreement for the UIP categorisation and for the 3 CT patterns in the entAUe observer group and in subgroups stratified by observer experience, were evaluated. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement across the diagnosis category scores among the 112 observers was moderate, ranging from 0.48 (IQR 0.18) for general radiologists to 0.52 (IQR 0.20) for thoracic radiologists of 10-20 years' experience. A binary score for UIP versus possible or inconsistent with UIP was examined. Observer agreement for this binary score was only moderate. No significant differences in agreement levels were identified when the CTs were stratified according to multidisciplinary team (MDT) diagnosis or patient age or when observers were categorised according to experience. Observer agreement for each of honeycombing, traction bronchiectasis and emphysema were 0.59+/-0.12, 0.42+/-0.15 and 0.43+/-0.18, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver agreement for the current ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT CT criteria for UIP is only moderate among thoracic radiologists, AUrespective of theAU experience, and did not vary with patient age or the MDT diagnosis