The association of dietary quality with colorectal cancer among normal weight, overweight and obese men and women: a prospective longitudinal study in the USA

OBJECTIVE: Lower body mass index (BMI) and higher dietary quality reduce the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). A full understanding of how these associations vary by sex and weight is lacking. METHODS: We used data from the National Institutes of Health - American Association of Retired Persons (NIH)-AARP) Diet and Health Study for 398 458 persons who were 50-71 years old in 1995-1996 and followed through 2006. Exposures were dietary quality as reflected by the Mediterranean Diet, the Healthy Eating Index-2010 and the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension score, stratified by BMI category. The outcome was CRC diagnosis from cancer registry data. Cox regression models were adjusted for disease risk factors. RESULTS: Over a mean duration of 123 months of follow-up, there were 6515 new diagnoses of CRC (1953 among the normal weight, 2924 among the overweight and 1638 among the obese; 4483 among men and 2032 among women). For normal weight and overweight men, we found a strong dose-response pattern for the association of increasing quintile of dietary quality with decreasing risk of CRC; this pattern was observed for obese men as well, but less consistently across the three measures of dietary quality. The findings were of smaller magnitude and less consistent for women but still suggesting associations of similar direction. CONCLUSION: We observed that increased dietary quality was associated with lower risk of incident CRC up to 10 years later for men regardless of baseline weight category

Approaches for classifying the indications for colonoscopy using detailed clinical data

BACKGROUND: Accurate indication classification is critical for obtaining unbiased estimates of colonoscopy effectiveness and quality improvement efforts, but there is a dearth of published systematic classification approaches. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of data-source and adjudication on indication classification and on estimates of the effectiveness of screening colonoscopy on late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis risk. METHODS: This was an observational study in members of four U.S. health plans. Eligible persons (n = 1039) were age 55-85 and had been enrolled for 5 years or longer in their health plans during 2006-2008. Patients were selected based on late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis in a case-control design; each case patient was matched to 1-2 controls by study site, age, sex, and health plan enrollment duration. Reasons for colonoscopies received in the 10-year period before the reference date were collected from three medical records sources (progress notes; referral notes; procedure reports) and categorized using an algorithm, with committee adjudication of some tests. We evaluated indication classification concordance before and after adjudication and used logistic regressions with the Wald Chi-square test to compare estimates of the effects of screening colonoscopy on late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis risk for each of our data sources to the adjudicated indication. RESULTS: Classification agreement between each data-source and adjudication was 78.8-94.0% (weighted kappa = 0.53-0.72); the highest agreement (weighted kappa = 0.86-0.88) was when information from all data sources was considered together. The choice of data-source influenced the association between screening colonoscopy and late-stage colorectal cancer diagnosis; estimates based on progress notes were closest to those based on the adjudicated indication (% difference in regression coefficients = 2.4%, p-value = 0.98), as compared to estimates from only referral notes (% difference in coefficients = 34.9%, p-value = 0.12) or procedure reports (% difference in coefficients = 27.4%, p-value = 0.23). CONCLUSION: There was no single gold-standard source of information in medical records. The estimates of colonoscopy effectiveness from progress notes alone were the closest to estimates using adjudicated indications. Thus, the details in the medical records are necessary for accurate indication classification

Neighborhood Socioeconomic Deprivation and Mortality: NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study

Residing in deprived areas may increase risk of mortality beyond that explained by a person's own SES-related factors and lifestyle. The aim of this study was to examine the relation between neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation and all-cause, cancer- and cardiovascular disease (CVD)-specific mortality for men and women after accounting for education and other important person-level risk factors.In the longitudinal NIH-AARP Study, we analyzed data from healthy participants, ages 50-71 years at study baseline (1995-1996). Deaths (n = 33831) were identified through December 2005. Information on census tracts was obtained from the 2000 US Census. Cox models estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for quintiles of neighborhood deprivation.Participants in the highest quintile of deprivation had elevated risks for overall mortality (HR(men) = 1.17, 95% CI: 1.10, 1.24; HR(women) = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.22) and marginally increased risk for cancer deaths (HR(men) = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.20; HR(women) = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.99, 1.22). CVD mortality associations appeared stronger in men (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.19, 1.49) than women (HR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.38). There was no evidence of an effect modification by education.Higher neighborhood deprivation was associated with modest increases in all-cause, cancer- and CVD-mortality after accounting for many established risk factors

Self-reported colorectal cancer screening of Medicare beneficiaries in family medicine vs. internal medicine practices in the United States: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The benefit of screening for decreasing the risk of death from colorectal cancer (CRC) has been shown, yet many patients in primary care are still not undergoing screening according to guidelines. There are known variations in delivery of preventive health care services among primary care physicians. This study compared self-reported CRC screening rates and patient awareness of the need for CRC screening of patients receiving care from family medicine (FPs) vs. internal medicine (internists) physicians.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Nationally representative sample of non-institutionalized beneficiaries who received medical care from FPs or internists in 2006 (using Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey). The main outcome was the percentage of patients screened in 2007. We also examined the percentage of patients offered screening.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients of FPs, compared to those of internists, were less likely to have received an FOBT kit or undergone home FOBT, even after accounting for patients' characteristics. Compared to internists, FPs' patients were more likely to have heard of colonoscopy, but were less likely to receive a screening colonoscopy recommendation (18% vs. 27%), or undergo a colonoscopy (43% vs. 46%, adjusted odds ratios [AOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]-- 0.65, 0.51-0.81) or any CRC screening (52% vs. 60%, AOR, CI--0.80, 0.68-0.94). Among subgroups examined, higher income beneficiaries receiving care from internists had the highest screening rate (68%), while disabled beneficiaries receiving care from FPs had the lowest screening rate (34%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Patients cared for by FPs had a lower rate of screening compared to those cared for by internists, despite equal or higher levels of awareness; a difference that remained statistically significant after accounting for socioeconomic status and access to healthcare. Both groups of patients remained below the national goal of 70 percent.</p

Neighborhood Socioeconomic Status and Use of Colonoscopy in an Insured Population – A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Low-socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with a higher colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality. Screening with colonoscopy, the most commonly used test in the US, has been shown to reduce the risk of death from CRC. This study examined if, among insured persons receiving care in integrated healthcare delivery systems, differences exist in colonoscopy use according to neighborhood SES. Methods We assembled a retrospective cohort of 100,566 men and women, 50–74 years old, who had been enrolled in one of three US health plans for $\geq$ 1 year on January 1, 2000. Subjects were followed until the date of first colonoscopy, date of disenrollment from the health plan, or December 31, 2007, whichever occurred first. We obtained data on colonoscopy use from administrative records. We defined screening colonoscopy as an examination that was not preceded by gastrointestinal conditions in the prior 6-month period. Neighborhood SES was measured using the percentage of households in each subject's census-tract with an income below 1999 federal poverty levels based on 2000 US census data. Analyses, adjusted for demographics and comorbidity index, were performed using Weibull regression models. Results: The average age of the cohort was 60 years and 52.7% were female. During 449,738 person-years of follow-up, fewer subjects in the lowest SES quartile (Q1) compared to the highest quartile (Q4) had any colonoscopy (26.7% vs. 37.1%) or a screening colonoscopy (7.6% vs. 13.3%). In regression analyses, compared to Q4, subjects in Q1 were 16% (adjusted HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.80–0.88) less likely to undergo any colonoscopy and 30%(adjusted HR = 0.70, CI: 0.65–0.75) less likely to undergo a screening colonoscopy. Conclusion: People in lower-SES neighborhoods are less likely to undergo a colonoscopy, even among insured subjects receiving care in integrated healthcare systems. Removing health insurance barriers alone is unlikely to eliminate disparities in colonoscopy use

Screening for Gynecologic Conditions With Pelvic Examination US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE Many conditions that can affect women\u27s health are often evaluated through pelvic examination. Although the pelvic examination is a common part of the physical examination, it is unclear whether performing screening pelvic examinations in asymptomatic women has a significant effect on disease morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force(USPSTF) recommendation on screening for gynecologic conditions with pelvic examination for conditions other than cervical cancer, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, for which the USPSTF has already made specific recommendations. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the accuracy, benefits, and potential harms of performing screening pelvic examinations in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adult women 18 years and older who are not at increased risk for any specific gynecologic condition. FINDINGS Overall, the USPSTF found inadequate evidence on screening pelvic examinations for the early detection and treatment of a range of gynecologic conditions in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adult women. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of performing screening pelvic examinations in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adult women. (I statement) This statement does not apply to specific disorders for which the USPSTF already recommends screening (ie, screening for cervical cancer with a Papanicolaou smear, screening for gonorrhea and chlamydia)

Effect of time to diagnostic testing for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening abnormalities on screening efficacy: A modeling study

Background: Patients who receive an abnormal cancer screening result require follow-up for diagnostic testing, but the time to follow-up varies across patients and practices. Methods: We used a simulation study to estimate the change in lifetime screening benefits when time to follow-up for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers was increased. Estimates were based on four independently developed microsimulation models that each simulated the life course of adults eligible for breast (women ages 50–74 years), cervical (women ages 21–65 years), or colorectal (adults ages 50–75 years) cancer screening. We assumed screening based on biennial mammography for breast cancer, triennial Papanicolaou testing for cervical cancer, and annual fecal immunochemical testing for colorectal cancer. For each cancer type, we simulated diagnostic testing immediately and at 3, 6, and 12 months after an abnormal screening exam. Results: We found declines in screening benefit with longer times to diagnostic testing, particularly for breast cancer screening. Compared to immediate diagnostic testing, testing at 3 months resulted in reduced screening benefit, with fewer undiscounted life years gained per 1,000 screened (breast: 17.3%, cervical: 0.8%, colorectal: 2.0% and 2.7%, from two colorectal cancer models), fewer cancers prevented (cervical: 1.4% fewer, colorectal: 0.5% and 1.7% fewer, respectively), and, for breast and colorectal cancer, a less favorable stage distribution. Conclusions: Longer times to diagnostic testing after an abnormal screening test can decrease screening effectiveness, but the impact varies substantially by cancer type. Impact: Understanding the impact of time to diagnostic testing on screening effectiveness can help inform quality improvement efforts. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 27(2); 158–64. 2017 AACR

Community engagement education in academic health centers, colleges, and universities

Community engagement (CE) is critical for advancing health equity and a key approach for promoting inclusive clinical and translational science. However, it requires a workforce trained to effectively design, implement, and evaluate health promotion and improvement strategies through meaningful collaboration with community members. This paper presents an approach for designing CE curricula for research, education, clinical care, and public health learners. A general pedagogical framework is presented to support curriculum development with the inclusion of community members as facilitators or faculty. The overall goal of the curriculum is envisioned as enabling learners to effectively demonstrate the principles of CE in working with community members on issues of concern to communities to promote health and well-being. We highlight transformations needed for the commonly used critical service-learn- ing model and the importance of faculty well-versed in CE. Courses may include didactics and practicums with well-defined objectives and evaluation components. Because of the importance of building and maintaining relationships in CE, a preparatory phase is recommended prior to experiential learning, which should be guided and designed to include debriefing and reflec- tive learning. Depending on the scope of the course, evaluation should include community perspectives on the experience

Multi-level perspectives on optimizing the quality of colorectal cancer screening

Objectives: The public health importance of colorectal cancer (CRC) The role of screening for CRC prevention and early diagnosis Measures for evaluating quality of CRC screening Recommendations for improving quality of screening Presentation: 46 minute