Age-related differences in breast cancer mortality according to race/ethnicity, insurance, and socioeconomic status.

BackgroundWe assessed breast cancer mortality in older versus younger women according to race/ethnicity, neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), and health insurance status.MethodsThe study included female breast cancer cases 18 years of age and older, diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 in the California Cancer Registry. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to generate hazard ratios (HR) of breast cancer specific deaths and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for older (60+ years) versus younger (< 60 years) patients separately by race/ethnicity, nSES, and health insurance status.ResultsRisk of dying from breast cancer was higher in older than younger patients after multivariable adjustment, which varied in magnitude by race/ethnicity (P-interaction< 0.0001). Comparing older to younger patients, higher mortality differences were shown for non-Hispanic White (HR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.36-1.51) and Hispanic women (HR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.26-1.50) and lower differences for non-Hispanic Blacks (HR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31) and Asians/Pacific Islanders (HR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.31). HRs comparing older to younger patients varied by insurance status (P-interaction< 0.0001), with largest mortality differences observed for privately insured women (HR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.59) and lowest in Medicaid/military/other public insurance (HR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.10-1.26). No age differences were shown for uninsured women. HRs comparing older to younger patients were similar across nSES strata.ConclusionOur results provide evidence for the continued disparity in Black-White breast cancer mortality, which is magnified in younger women. Moreover, insurance status continues to play a role in breast cancer mortality, with uninsured women having the highest risk for breast cancer death, regardless of age

U.S. adolescent and adult women\u27s experiences accessing and using toilets in schools, workplaces, and public spaces: A multi-site focus group study to inform future research in bladder health

The World Health Organization recognizes access to clean and safe toilets as crucial for public health. This study explored U.S. adolescent and adult cisgender women\u27s lived experiences accessing toilets in schools, workplaces, and public spaces. As part of the Prevention of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (PLUS) Research Consortium, we conducted 44 focus groups with female participants (n = 360; ages 11-93). Focus groups were stratified by age (11-14, 15-17, 18-25, 26-44, 45-64, 65+) and conducted across 7 geographically diverse U.S. sites from July 2017-April 2018. Using a transdisciplinary approach, we conducted conventional qualitative coding informed by our PLUS conceptual framework and used content analysis processes to identify salient themes. Across settings, toilet access was restricted by gatekeepers (i.e., individuals who control access to toilets). In contrast, self-restricting toilet use (deciding not to use the toilet despite biologic need to urinate) was based on internalized norms to prioritize school and job responsibilities over urination. In public spaces, self-restricting use was largely in response to lack of cleanliness. Across the life course, participants perceived gender disparities in the ability to easily access public toilets. Further research is needed to determine if and how these factors impact bladder health across the life course

Prevention of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Research Consortium focus group Study of Habits, Attitudes, Realities, and Experiences of Bladder health

AimThe study purpose is to explore adolescent and adult women’s experiences, perceptions, beliefs, knowledge and behaviours related to bladder health across the life course using a socioecological perspective. Lower urinary tract symptoms affect between 20-40% of young adult to middle-aged women, with symptoms increasing in incidence and severity with aging. There is limited evidence to address bladder health promotion and prevention of dysfunction. This first study of the Prevention of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (PLUS) Research Consortium is designed to address gaps in existing qualitative research in this area.DesignThis focus group study will be implemented across seven geographically diverse United States research centres using a semi-structured focus group guide informed by a conceptual framework based on the socioecological model.MethodsThe study was approved in July 2017. A total of 44 focus groups composed of 6-8 participants representing six different age categories (ranging from 11 to over 65 years) will be completed. We aim to recruit participants with diverse demographic and personal characteristics including race, ethnicity, education, socioeconomic status, urban/rural residence, physical/health conditions, and urinary symptom experience. Six of the focus groups will be conducted in Spanish and translated into English. Focus group transcripts will undergo content analysis and data interpretation to identify and classify themes and articulate emerging themes.DiscussionThis foundational qualitative study seeks to develop an evidence base to inform future research on bladder health promotion in adolescent and adult women.ImpactThis study has the potential to provide new insights and understanding into adolescent and adult women’s lived experience of bladder health, the experience of lower urinary symptoms and knowledge and beliefs across the life course.ç ®ç æ ¬ç  ç©¶ç ç ®ç æ ¯ä» ç¤¾ä¼ ç æ å­¦ç è§ åº¦,æ ¢è®¨é å° å¹´å æ å¹´å¥³æ §å ¨äººç è¿ ç¨ ä¸­ä¸ è è ±å ¥åº·ç ¸å ³ç ç» éª ã è§ å¿µã 信念ã ç ¥è¯ å è¡ ä¸ºã ä¸ å°¿è·¯ç ç ¶å½±å 20-40%ç 中é å¹´å¥³æ §,é ç å¹´é¾ ç å¢ é ¿,ç ç ¶ç å ç ç å 严é ç¨ åº¦é ½å ¨å¢ é ¿ã å ³äº ä¿ è¿ è è ±å ¥åº·å é¢ é ²å è ½é ç¢ ç è¯ æ ®æ é ã æ ¬æ¬¡é¢ é ²ä¸ å°¿è·¯ç ç ¶(PLUS)ç  ç©¶è ç ç ç  ç©¶æ ¯é¦ ä¸ªå ³äº æ­¤æ ¹é ¢ç ç  ç©¶,æ ¨å ¨è§£å ³ç °æ ç å® æ §ç  ç©¶å ¨è¿ æ ¹é ¢ç å·®è· ã è®¾è®¡è¯¥é¡¹ç ¦ç ¹å° ç» ç  ç©¶å° å ¨ä¸ ä¸ªä¸ å ä½ ç½®ç ç¾ å ½ç  ç©¶ä¸­å¿ è¿ è¡ ,ä»¥å ºäº ç¤¾ä¼ ç æ 模å æ¦ å¿µæ¡ æ ¶ç å ç» æ å ç ç ¦ç ¹å° ç» æ å 为æ 导ã æ ¹æ³ è¯¥ç  ç©¶äº 2017å¹´7æ è ·å¾ æ ¹å ã ç ±6-8å 代表6ä¸ªä¸ å å¹´é¾ ç±»å «(ä» 11å² å °65å² ä»¥ä¸ )ç å ä¸ è ç» æ å ±44ä¸ªç ¦ç ¹å° ç» ã æ 们计å æ å ä¸ å äººå £å ä¸ªäººç ¹å¾ ç å ä¸ è ,ä¾ å¦ ç§ æ ã ç§ æ æ¸ æº ã æ è ²ç» å ã ç¤¾ä¼ ç» æµ å °ä½ ã å ä¹¡å± æ° ã èº«ä½ /å ¥åº·ç ¶å µå æ³ å°¿ç³»ç» ç ç ¶ç» å ã å ­ä¸ªç ¦ç ¹å° ç» ç ç  ç©¶å° ä»¥è¥¿ç ­ç è¯­è¿ è¡ ,å¹¶ç¿»è¯ æ è ±è¯­ã ç ¦ç ¹å° ç» ç èª æ ¬å° è¢«ç ¨äº å 容å æ å æ °æ ®è§£é ,ä»¥ç¡®å® å å ç±»ä¸»é¢ ,并é æ æ °å ºç °ç ä¸»é¢ ã è®¨è®ºè¿ é¡¹å ºç¡ æ §ç å® æ §ç  ç©¶æ ¨å ¨ä¸ºæ é« æ ªæ ¥é å° å¹´å æ å¹´å¦ å¥³ç è è ±å ¥åº·ç ç  ç©¶æ ä¾ è¯ æ ®å ºç¡ ã å½±å è¿ é¡¹ç  ç©¶æ å ¯è ½æ ä¾ å ³äº é å° å¹´å æ å¹´å¦ å¥³ç è è ±å ¥åº·ç ç æ´»ç» éª ,ç» éª ç ä¸ å°¿è·¯ç ç ¶å ç ¥è¯ å ç æ³ ç 人ç è¿ ç¨ ä¸­æ °ç è§ è§£å ç 解ãPeer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151981/1/jan14148_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151981/2/jan14148.pd

A pragmatic randomized trial of mailed fecal immunochemical testing to increase colorectal cancer screening among low‐income and minoritized populations

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused, particularly among low-income and minoritized populations, for whom the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged progress in achieving equity.MethodsA hub-and-spoke model was used. The hub was a nonacademic organization and the spokes were three community health center (CHC) systems overseeing numerous clinic sites. Via a cluster-randomized trial design, nine clinic sites were randomized to intervention and 16 clinic sites were randomized to usual care. Patient-level interventions included invitation letters, mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and call/text-based reminders. Year 1 intervention impact, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, was assessed as the proportion completing screening among individuals not up to date at baseline, which compared intervention and nonintervention clinics accounting for intraclinic cluster variation; confidence intervals (CIs) around differences not including 0 were interpreted as statistically significant.ResultsAmong 26,736 patients who met eligibility criteria, approximately 58% were female, 55% were Hispanic individuals, and 44% were Spanish speaking. The proportion completing screening was 11.5 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI, 6.1-16.9 ppts) higher in intervention versus usual care clinics. Variation in differences between intervention and usual care clinics was observed by sex (12.6 ppts [95% CI, 7.2-18.0 ppts] for females; 8.8 ppts [95% CI, 4.7-13.9 ppts] for males) and by racial and ethnic group (13.8 ppts [95% CI, 7.0-20.6 ppts] for Hispanic individuals; 13.0 ppts [95% CI, 3.6-22.4 ppts] for Asian individuals; 11.3 ppts [95% CI, 5.8-16.8 ppts] for non-Hispanic White individuals; 6.1 ppts [95% CI, 0.8-10.4 ppts] for Black individuals).ConclusionsA regional mailed FIT intervention was effective for increasing CRC screening rates across CHC systems serving diverse, low-income populations

Common variants in breast cancer risk loci predispose to distinct tumor subtypes.

BACKGROUND: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified multiple common breast cancer susceptibility variants. Many of these variants have differential associations by estrogen receptor (ER) status, but how these variants relate with other tumor features and intrinsic molecular subtypes is unclear. METHODS: Among 106,571 invasive breast cancer cases and 95,762 controls of European ancestry with data on 173 breast cancer variants identified in previous GWAS, we used novel two-stage polytomous logistic regression models to evaluate variants in relation to multiple tumor features (ER, progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and grade) adjusting for each other, and to intrinsic-like subtypes. RESULTS: Eighty-five of 173 variants were associated with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 5%), most commonly ER and grade, followed by PR and HER2. Models for intrinsic-like subtypes found nearly all of these variants (83 of 85) associated at p < 0.05 with risk for at least one luminal-like subtype, and approximately half (41 of 85) of the variants were associated with risk of at least one non-luminal subtype, including 32 variants associated with triple-negative (TN) disease. Ten variants were associated with risk of all subtypes in different magnitude. Five variants were associated with risk of luminal A-like and TN subtypes in opposite directions. CONCLUSION: This report demonstrates a high level of complexity in the etiology heterogeneity of breast cancer susceptibility variants and can inform investigations of subtype-specific risk prediction

Genome-wide association study identifies 32 novel breast cancer susceptibility loci from overall and subtype-specific analyses.

Breast cancer susceptibility variants frequently show heterogeneity in associations by tumor subtype1-3. To identify novel loci, we performed a genome-wide association study including 133,384 breast cancer cases and 113,789 controls, plus 18,908 BRCA1 mutation carriers (9,414 with breast cancer) of European ancestry, using both standard and novel methodologies that account for underlying tumor heterogeneity by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and tumor grade. We identified 32 novel susceptibility loci (P < 5.0 × 10-8), 15 of which showed evidence for associations with at least one tumor feature (false discovery rate < 0.05). Five loci showed associations (P < 0.05) in opposite directions between luminal and non-luminal subtypes. In silico analyses showed that these five loci contained cell-specific enhancers that differed between normal luminal and basal mammary cells. The genetic correlations between five intrinsic-like subtypes ranged from 0.35 to 0.80. The proportion of genome-wide chip heritability explained by all known susceptibility loci was 54.2% for luminal A-like disease and 37.6% for triple-negative disease. The odds ratios of polygenic risk scores, which included 330 variants, for the highest 1% of quantiles compared with middle quantiles were 5.63 and 3.02 for luminal A-like and triple-negative disease, respectively. These findings provide an improved understanding of genetic predisposition to breast cancer subtypes and will inform the development of subtype-specific polygenic risk scores