Publications

OBJECTIVE: Messaging about breast cancer screening cessation may reduce over-screening by raising awareness of the harms of screening, but in a background of strongly positive beliefs about screening among the public, such messaging may be perceived negatively. We aimed to assess whether older women perceived it to be ethically appropriate for clinicians to share a message that encourages breast cancer screening cessation.

METHODS: As part of a large national online survey experiment with women 65+ years, we presented a message (hereafter referred to as primary message) describing the rationales for stopping breast cancer screening (e.g., guideline recommendation, harms of screening) and assessed how ethical women thought it would be for doctors to share this information with patients. We assessed open-ended reactions. We also tested two variations of the primary message with different wordings of the recommendation to consider stopping screening.

RESULTS: Of 683 participants, 75.9 % agreed that the primary message is ethically appropriate for doctors to share with patients., 13.2 % neither agree or disagree, and 10.9 % disagreed. Themes in open-ended responses suggested that the difference in participant response was partly attributed to whether participants perceived the message as informative or persuasive. Comparing across message variations, messages with stronger recommendations to stop screening were perceived to be less ethically appropriate than the primary message.

CONCLUSIONS: Most older women perceived that it was ethically appropriate for doctors to share messages aimed at reducing breast cancer over-screening with patients.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Interventions should be developed to deliver messages to reduce over-screening among older women in practice settings, with evaluations to monitor their response.

BackgroundMessaging strategies hold promise to reduce breast cancer overscreening. However, it is not known whether they may have differential effects among medical maximizers who prefer to take action about their health versus medical minimizers who prefer to wait and see.MethodsIn a randomized controlled survey experiment that included 2 sequential surveys with 3,041 women aged 65+ y from a US population-based online panel, we randomized participants to 1) no messages, 2) single exposure to a screening cessation message, or 3) 2 exposures over time to the screening cessation message. We assessed support for stopping screening in a hypothetical patient and intention to stop screening oneself on 7-point scales, where higher values indicated stronger support and intentions to stop screening. We conducted stratified analyses by medical-maximizing preference and moderation analysis.ResultsOf the women, 40.7% (n = 1,238) were medical maximizers; they had lower support and intention for screening cessation in all groups compared with the medical minimizers. Two message exposures increased support for screening cessation among medical maximizers, with a mean score of 3.68 (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.51-3.85) compared with no message (mean score 2.20, 95% CI 2.00-2.39, P < 0.001). A similar pattern was seen for screening intention. Linear regression models showed no differential messaging effect by medical-maximizing preference.ConclusionsMedical maximizers, although less likely to support screening cessation, were nonetheless responsive to messaging strategies designed to reduce breast cancer overscreening.HighlightsIt is not known if a message on rationales for stopping breast cancer screening would have differential effects among medical maximizers who prefer to take action when it comes to their health versus medical minimizers who prefer to wait and see.In a 2-wave randomized controlled survey experiment with 3,041 older women, we found that medical maximizers, although less likely to support screening cessation compared with medical minimizers, were nonetheless responsive to the messaging intervention, and the magnitude of the intervention effect was similar between maximizers and minimizers.Medical maximizers reported higher levels of worry and annoyance after reading the message compared with the minimizers, but the absolute levels of worry and annoyance were low.Our findings suggest that messaging can be a useful tool for reducing overscreening even in a highly reluctant population.

BACKGROUND: Treatment burden refers to the patient-perceived effort of managing health and health care, which impacts quality of life and engagement in care. International studies of treatment burden have found high rates of treatment burden among adults with chronic conditions. However, the scope of treatment burden among US older adults is unknown. We described the prevalence of and characteristics associated with treatment burden among US adults age ≥ 50 years.

METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of 1795 adult respondents to the 2022 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) Treatment Burden Questionnaire (TBQ), a random sub-sample from a nationally-representative panel study of community-dwelling US adults age ≥ 50 years. The primary outcome was total treatment burden score (15 items each scored 0-10, total 0-150; threshold ≥ 59 for high burden). We used multivariable linear regression to examine the association between log-transformed total treatment burden score and sociodemographic, health, and functional status characteristics.

RESULTS: The mean age of 1795 respondents was 68.5 (SD 8.5) years, 56% were female, and the median TBQ score was 12 (IQR 5-25). Overall, 87% (n = 1550) reported treatment burden (TBQ score ≥ 1); 5% reported high burden. The most common sources of treatment burden were reminders of health problems (61%) and administrative (53%) and financial burdens (46%). Adults age ≥ 65 years were both less likely to report treatment burden and reported lower burden than adults age 50-64 years. Factors associated with greater burden included a higher number of chronic conditions, vision or hearing impairment, ADL/IADL difficulty, and mobility difficulty.

CONCLUSIONS: Most US adults age ≥ 50 years report treatment burden, though there is wide variation in the degree of burden reported. Reducing treatment burden within the US may require reducing administrative and financial burdens of care and addressing factors that impair patient capacity to manage health and health care.

OBJECTIVES: Guidelines recommend women consider their breast cancer risk and life expectancy when deciding on breast cancer screening (e.g., intervals, when to stop) and prevention medication. We previously developed a competing-risk model to predict 10-year breast cancer risk and non-breast cancer death in women > 55 years to support decision-making. Here, we aimed to develop a decision aid (DA) website incorporating our model's risk estimates.

METHODS: We designed the DA based on international standards using the free R package Shiny. We included a risk-assessment page, risk estimates, and decision support on breast cancer screening and prevention medications. We recruited national experts, Boston-area primary care practitioners (PCPs), and female patients > 55 years without breast cancer history to provide feedback on the DA via questionnaire or personal interview. We used thematic analysis to identify themes in participants' open-ended comments until reaching thematic saturation. Study questionnaires assessed DA helpfulness and ease-of-use.

RESULTS: Forty-five (53.6 %) of 84 eligible patients approached participated. Their mean age was 65.9 years (SD 7.9), 31 (68.9 %) were non-Hispanic White, and 31 (68.9 %) graduated college. Of 52 experts/PCPs contacted, 30 participated. Participants found the DA helpful (35/44 patients [79.5 %] and 28/29 [96.6 %] experts/PCPs) and easy-to-use (39/45 patients [86.7 %] and 28/29 PCPs/experts, [96.6 %]). They described the DA as "informative" and liked the "tailored-risk information." They suggested changes to simplify the DA and to better individualize the decision-support. We iteratively revised the website. We could not program some recommended changes using the free R application.

CONCLUSIONS: We developed an informative and easy-to-use breast cancer screening and prevention medication DA website (https://bcrisk55plus.shinyapps.io/risktool/) for women > 55 using free software. Next, we will program the website using HTML code and test its effects prospectively.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We anticipate that use of the DA will help women > 55 with breast cancer screening and prevention decisions.

BACKGROUND: Medical cannabis consumption is rising, but limited evidence informs the safety and efficacy of cannabis use in cancer patients. A national survey of oncology trainees found that most fellows felt insufficiently informed to make clinical recommendations about cannabis.

AIM: In this secondary analysis, we aimed to measure how frequently trainees recommend in favor of cannabis and determine factors influencing this clinical practice.

METHODS: In this cross-sectional survey study for fellows enrolled in oncology training programs across the United States, an online survey assessing trainee practices regarding medical cannabis was sent to 155 oncology fellowship program directors from January - March 2021; who were asked to distribute it to their fellows. The primary outcome was the frequency with which oncology fellows recommended cannabis in the prior year.

RESULTS: Nationally, 40 programs from 25 states participated, with 189 of 462 trainees across these programs responding (40.9% response rate). 22% (95% CI: 16.3-29.0%) of participants reported recommending medical cannabis to > 5 patients in the past year. 24% (95% CI: 18.4-30.5%) of participants had prior training in medical cannabis. Regarding participant characteristics, only prior training in medical cannabis was significantly associated with recommending cannabis to > 5 patients (RR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.4-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS: With increasing cannabis use among patients with cancer and given that a substantial number of oncology fellows recommend its use, it is crucial that fellowship training incorporate evidence-based curricula regarding medical cannabis use to guide informed decision-making between patients and their fellow providers.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) visits offer opportunities for seriously ill patients to formulate future medical care goals, yet ED clinicians lack practical strategies for these conversations. ED GOAL, a behavioral intervention, engages seriously ill yet clinically stable older adults in the ED to address advance care planning (ACP) with their outpatient clinicians. In a randomized trial, goals-of-care documentation was significantly higher in the intervention group compared to controls after three (24.3% vs. 9.9%, p = 0.03) and 6 months (31.4% vs. 12.7%, p < 0.01). This study is a sub-analysis to learn about intervention arm participants' perceived benefits and obstacles of the intervention.

METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews between October 2022 and August 2024 (N = 52) with intervention-arm patients aged 50+ years at three hospitals in Boston, Massachusetts. Using rapid qualitative analyses, we identified themes in intervention-arm participants' comments to open-ended questions about the intervention's benefits and obstacles to continue ACP outside the ED.

RESULTS: Of 70 intervention-arm participants, 52 completed interviews, of which two were surrogates. ED GOAL motivated most patients to initiate ACP with outpatient clinicians and loved ones and improved the quality of conversations by clarifying patients' wishes and improving patient-clinician relations. Barriers to continuing ACP were the lack of clinician availability and patient/surrogate readiness. Those with clear care goals found the intervention less useful yet harmless.

CONCLUSIONS: The intervention provided participants with insights into actionable ACP steps. To address the lack of clinician availability, these conversations may be completed by non-physician clinicians or through non-personnel resources. Better tailored ACP interventions may improve patients' readiness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05209880.

IMPORTANCE: Conversations between seriously ill patients and clinicians about values and goals (ie, serious illness conversations [SICs]) can lead to patient-centered care toward the end of life. However, many patients have not had SICs when arriving in the emergency department (ED) and are at risk of receiving undesired care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of an ED-based, multimodal SIC intervention (known as ED GOAL) compared with usual care on patient-reported engagement in advance care planning (ACP) and clinician-documented SICs after leaving the ED.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This 2-armed, 1:1, parallel-design randomized clinical trial was conducted at 3 participating EDs (2 academic medical centers and 1 community hospital) in Boston, Massachusetts, within a single health system between March 1, 2022, and July 1, 2024, with a follow-up duration of 6 months. Eligible participants were English-speaking adults 50 years or older with serious illnesses, including mild cognitive impairment or mild dementia, along with their caregivers. For patients with moderate to severe dementia, caregivers were the primary participants in the study. Patients with documented goals for medical care or physician orders in the last 3 months in medical records or deemed clinically inappropriate by the treating ED team were excluded.

INTERVENTION: SIC-trained research nurses conducted (1) a motivational interview about SICs, (2) a structured SIC, and (3) communication priming for the patients and their primary clinicians to reinitiate SICs on a tablet computer in the ED or within 1 week after leaving the ED.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a validated survey of patient-reported engagement in ACP at 1 month, with total possible scores ranging from 1 to 5, with higher scores indicating more engagement. Secondary outcomes included clinician documentation of end-of-life values and preferences in the medical record and completed advance directives.

RESULTS: A total of 141 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.7 [9.2] years; 73 [51.8%] female), predominantly diagnosed with metastatic cancer (85 [60.3%]), were enrolled and randomized to the intervention (n = 70) or usual care (n = 71). At 1 month, no difference was observed in patient-reported engagement in ACP (mean [SD] score, 3.32 [1.28] for control vs 3.37 [1.07] for intervention; maximum possible score, 5.00; P = .58), yet 12 patients in the intervention group (17.1%) discussed care preferences with their physicians compared with 5 (7.0%) control group patients (P = .07). Medical record documentation of end-of-life values and goals was significantly higher in the intervention group at 3 months (17 [24.3%] vs 7 [9.9%]; P = .03) and 6 months (22 [31.4%] vs 9 [12.7%]; P =  .008).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial of seriously ill older adults in the ED, while a nurse-led SIC intervention did not significantly improve patient-reported engagement in ACP, it did increase clinician-documented SICs in the medical records. ED visits may serve as a critical access point to enhance SICs for seriously ill yet clinically stable older adults.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05209880.

PURPOSE: To inform decision making around mammography-screening frequency and cessation, we previously used Fine-Gray competing-risk regression to develop and validate a model to estimate older women's 10-year risk of breast cancer and their competing risk of non-breast cancer (non-BC) death. Here, we aimed to understand the amount of incident breast cancer and non-BC death risk explained by our model among women ≥ 65y.

METHODS: We included women ≥ 65y who completed the 2004 Nurses' Health Study questionnaire (NHS, n = 59,662) or who participated in the Women's Health Initiative-Extension Study (WHI-ES, n = 82,528). We calculated our model's full and risk factor-specific population attributable risk (PAR%) for incident breast cancer and non-BC death.

RESULTS: Mean age of the NHS participants was 73.5y (SD 5.2); 3.1% were diagnosed with breast cancer and 26.1% experienced non-BC death within 10 years. Mean age of WHI-ES participants was 73.6y (SD 5.4); 4.2% were diagnosed with breast cancer and 17.7% experienced non-BC death within 10 years. The full-model PAR% for breast cancer was 58.8% (22.7-80.6) in NHS and 54.8% (24.8-75.2%) in WHI-ES. Modifiable risk factors explained approximately 1/3 of breast cancer risk; BMI ≥ 30 had a PAR% of 6.5% (3.1-9.9%) in NHS and 12.2% (8.5-16.0%) in WHI-ES. For non-BC death, the full-model PAR% was 94.2% (91.4-96.1%) in NHS and 86.2% (80.9-90.0%) in WHI-ES.

CONCLUSIONS: Our competing-risk model explained the majority of breast cancers and non-BC deaths in women ≥ 65y, and we identified risk factors (e.g., elevated BMI) that may be targeted to reduce the burden of breast cancer in older women.