Publications

Guidelines for optimal cancer screening in older adults remain unclear, particularly for adults over the age of 75. While cancer screening in older adults may benefit some in good health, it may cause unnecessary burdens in others with limited life expectancy. Thus, a systematic approach to enable individualized cancer screening decisions in older adults is needed. We suggest a framework that guides such decisions through evidence-based approaches from multiple interactions, and that involves the patient, clinician, and healthcare system. An individualized approach considers differences in disease risk rather than the chronological age of the patient. This paper presents a comprehensive framework that depicts the independent and converging levels of influences on individualized cancer screening decisions in older adults. This Individualized Decisions for Screening (IDS) framework recognizes the reality of these interrelationships, including the tensions that arise when behaviors and outcomes are valued differently at the patient, clinician, and healthcare organization levels. Person-centered approaches are essential to advancing multilevel research of individualized cancer screening decisions among older adults.

OBJECTIVES: To examine receipt of colorectal cancer (CRC) screening according to age and life expectancy (LE) in adults aged 65 and older.

DESIGN: Population-based survey.

SETTING: United States.

PARTICIPANTS: Community dwelling adults aged 65 and older who participated in the 2008 or 2010 National Health Interview Survey (N = 7,747).

MEASUREMENTS: Receipt of CRC screening (e.g., colonoscopy within 10 years) was examined according to age and LE (≥10 and <10 years), adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics and survey year. Frequency of CRC screening was also examined according to age and LE at time of screening (e.g., age at colonoscopy rather than at interview). Participants screened when they were aged 75 and older or had less than a 10-year LE were considered to have received screening inconsistent with guidelines.

RESULTS: Overall, 38.5% of participants had less than a 10-year LE; 40.2% were aged 75 and older, and 56.3% had received recent CRC screening (90.1% by colonoscopy). CRC screening was higher in 2010 (58.9%) than 2008 (53.7%, P <.001) and was associated with longer LE and younger age, although 51.1% of adults aged 75 and older reported receiving CRC screening, as did 50.9% of adults with less than a 10-year LE. Based on age and LE at time of screening (rather than at interview), 28.4% of CRC screening of adults aged 65 and older was targeted to those aged 75 and older and those with less than a 10-year LE. Of adults aged 65 to 75 with a 10-year LE or more (adults recommended for screening by guidelines), 39.2% had not recently been screened.

CONCLUSION: Older adults with little chance of benefit because of limited LE commonly undergo CRC screening, whereas many adults aged 65 to 75 with a 10-year LE or greater are not screened.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer remains controversial. Most groups recommend informed decision making for men with 10 years of remaining life expectancy. The primary objective of this observational cohort study was to investigate the association between predicted 9-year mortality and prostate cancer screening among American men aged ≥65 years in 2005 and 2010. The second objective was to analyze the proportions of men who discussed screening with their physicians.

METHODS: Data were extracted from the 2005 and 2010 National Health Interview Surveys. Men aged ≥65 years without prostate cancer were divided into predicted 9-year mortality quartiles. The proportions of men confirming a screening PSA within the prior year were determined. Logistic regression was used to compare screening rates.

RESULTS: Screening rates for men aged ≥65 years were 48% in 2005 and 48% in 2010 (P = .9). Men ages 65 to 74 years who had <27% predicted 9-year mortality were most commonly screened, with 56% screened in 2010, compared with 34% of men aged ≥75 years with >75% predicted 9-year mortality. Approximately 55% of screened men aged ≥75 years who had ≥53% predicted 9-year mortality recalled discussing the advantages of screening, whereas 25% recalled discussing the disadvantages.

CONCLUSIONS: Prostate cancer screening with PSA did not differ significantly between 2005 and 2010 for men aged ≥65 years based on predicted 9-year mortality. Approximately 33% of older men with a high likelihood of 9-year mortality were screened despite minimal clinical benefit. Twice as many men recalled discussing the potential advantages of screening compared with the disadvantages. Cancer 2014;120:1491-1498. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

PURPOSE: There is insufficient evidence to recommend mammography for women >75 years. Guidelines recommend that older women be informed of the uncertainty of benefit and potential for harm, especially for women with short life expectancy. However, few older women are informed of harms of screening and many with short life expectancy are screened. Therefore, we aim to test whether a mammography screening decision aid (DA) for women >75 years affects their use of mammography, particularly for women with <10 year life expectancy.

METHODS/DESIGN: The DA is a self-administered pamphlet that includes information on screening outcomes, tailored information on breast cancer risk, health, life expectancy, and competing mortality risks, and includes a values clarification exercise. We are conducting a large cluster randomized controlled trial (RCT) of the DA with the primary care provider (PCP) as the unit of randomization to evaluate its efficacy. We plan to recruit 550 women 75-89 years from 100 PCPs to receive either the mammography DA or a pamphlet on home safety for older adults (control arm) before a visit with their PCP, depending on their PCP's randomization assignment. The primary outcome is receipt of mammography screening assessed through chart abstraction. Secondary outcomes include effect of the DA on older women's screening intentions, knowledge, and decisional conflict, and on documented discussions about mammography by their PCPs. We will recruit women from 5 Boston-based primary care practices (3 community-based internal medicine practices and 2 academic practices), and 2 North Carolina-based academic primary care practices.

DISCUSSION: It is essential that we test the DA in a large RCT to determine if it is efficacious and to substantiate the need for broad translation into clinical practice. Our DA has the potential to improve health care utilization and care in a manner dictated by patient preferences.

IMPORTANCE: Guidelines recommend that women 75 years and older should be informed of the benefits and risks of mammography before being screened. However, few are adequately informed.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate a mammography screening decision aid (DA) for women 75 years and older.

DESIGN: We designed the DA using international standards. Between July 14, 2010, and April 10, 2012, participants completed a pretest survey and read the DA before an appointment with their primary care physician. They completed a posttest survey after their appointment. Medical records were reviewed for follow-up information.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Boston, Massachusetts, academic primary care practice. Eligible women were aged 75 to 89 years, English speaking, had not had a mammogram in 9 months but had been screened within the past 3 years, and did not have a history of dementia or invasive or noninvasive breast cancer. Of 84 women approached, 27 declined to participate, 12 were unable to complete the study for logistical reasons, and 45 participated.

INTERVENTIONS: The DA includes information on breast cancer risk, life expectancy, competing mortality risks, possible outcomes of screening, and a values clarification exercise.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Knowledge of the benefits and risks of screening, decisional conflict, and screening intentions; documentation in the medical record of a discussion of the risks and benefits of mammography with a primary care physician within 6 months; and the receipt of screening within 15 months. We used the Wilcoxon signed rank test and McNemar test to compare pretest-posttest information.

RESULTS: The median age of participants was 79 years, 69% (31 of 45) were of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity, and 60% (27 of 45) had attended at least some college. Comparison of posttest results with pretest results demonstrated 2 findings. First, knowledge of the benefits and risks of screening improved (P < .001). Second, fewer participants intended to be screened (56% [25 of 45] afterward compared with 82% [37 of 45] before, P = .03). Decisional conflict declined but not significantly (P = .10). In the following 6 months, 53% (24 of 45) of participants had a primary care physician note that documented the discussion of the risks and benefits of screening compared with 11% (5 of 45) in the previous 5 years (P < .001). While 84% (36 of 43) had been screened within 2 years of participating, 60% (26 of 43) were screened within 15 months after participating (≥ 2 years since their last mammogram) (P = .01). Overall, 93% (42 of 45) found the DA helpful.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A DA may improve older women's decision making about mammography screening.

The purpose of this study was to better understand older women's experience with breast cancer treatment decisions. We conducted a longitudinal study of non-demented, English-speaking women ≥ 65 years recruited from three Boston-based breast imaging centers. We interviewed women at the time of breast biopsy (before they knew their results) and 6 months later. At baseline, we assessed intention to accept different breast cancer treatments, sociodemographic, and health characteristics. At follow-up, we asked women about their involvement in treatment decisions, to describe how they chose a treatment, and influencing factors. We assessed tumor characteristics through chart abstraction. We used quantitative and qualitative analyses. Seventy women (43 ≥ 75 years) completed both interviews and were diagnosed with breast cancer; 91 % were non-Hispanic white. At baseline, women 75+ were less likely than women 65-74 to report that they would accept surgery and/or take a medication for ≥ 5 years if recommended for breast disease. Women 75+ were ultimately less likely to receive hormonal therapy for estrogen receptor positive tumors than women 65-74. Women 75+ asked their surgeons fewer questions about their treatment options and were less likely to seek information from other sources. A surgeon's recommendation was the most influential factor affecting older women's treatment decisions. In open-ended comments, 17 women reported having no perceived choice about treatment and 42 stated they simply followed their physician's recommendation for at least one treatment choice. In conclusion, to improve care of older women with breast cancer, interventions are needed to increase their engagement in treatment decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about older women's experience with a benign breast biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the psychological impact and experience of women ≥ 65 years of age with a benign breast biopsy.

DESIGN: Prospective cohort study using quantitative and qualitative methods.

SETTING: Three Boston-based breast imaging centers.

PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-four English-speaking women ≥ 65 years without dementia referred for breast biopsy as a result of an abnormal mammogram, not aware of their biopsy results at baseline, and with a subsequent negative biopsy.

MEASUREMENTS: We interviewed women at the time of breast biopsy (before women knew their results) and 6 months post-biopsy. At both interviews, participants completed the validated negative psychological consequences of screening mammography questionnaire (PCQ, scores range from 0 to 36 [high distress], PCQ ≥ 1 suggests a psychological consequence, PCQs <1 are reported at time of screening) and women responded to open-ended questions about their experience. At follow-up, participants described the quality of information received after their benign breast biopsy. We used a linear mixed effects model to examine if PCQs declined over time. We also reviewed participants' open-ended comments for themes.

RESULTS: Overall, 88% (83/94) of participants were non-Hispanic white and 33% (31/94) had a high-school degree or less. At biopsy, 76% (71/94) reported negative psychological consequences from their biopsy compared to 39% (37/94) at follow-up (p < 0.01). In open-ended comments, participants noted the anxiety (29%, 27/94) and discomfort (28%, 26/94) experienced at biopsy (especially from positioning on the biopsy table). Participants requested more information to prepare for a biopsy and to interpret their negative results. Forty-four percent (39/89) reported at least a little anxiety about future mammograms.

CONCLUSIONS: The high psychological burden of a benign breast biopsy among older women significantly diminishes with time but does not completely resolve. To reduce this burden, older women need more information about undergoing a breast biopsy.