Publications

Early detection through screening can reduce mortality rates of cervical cancer, and yet Hispanic women who have incidence rates higher than their non-Hispanic White counterparts are least likely to participate in cancer screening initiatives. This study utilized data from the 2008 wave of the Health and Retirement Study to investigate the psychosocial correlates associated with older Hispanic women's participation in cervical cancer screening services. Logistic regression models were used. Findings indicated that greater life satisfaction and religiosity were associated with a greater likelihood of participating in cervical cancer screening. Despite ongoing national conversations, evidence indicates there is agreement that underserved women need to be screened, particularly the older Hispanic population.

BACKGROUND: Seriously ill older adults in the emergency department (ED) may benefit from palliative care referral, yet little is known about how to identify these patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the performance and determine the acceptability of a content-validated palliative care screening tool.

DESIGN: We surveyed Emergency Medicine (EM) attending physicians at the end of their shifts using the screening tool and asked them to retrospectively apply it to all patients ≥65 years whom they had cared for. We conducted the survey for three consecutive weeks in October 2015.

SETTING/SUBJECTS: EM attending physicians at an urban, university-affiliated ED.

MEASUREMENT: Patient characteristics, acceptability rating, and time per patient screened.

RESULTS: We approached 38 attending physicians to apply the screening tool for 69 eligible shifts. Physicians agreed to participate during 55 shifts (80%) and screened 207 patients. On 14 shifts (20%), physicians declined to participate. Mean age of the screened patients was 75 years, 51% were male, and 45% had at least one life-limiting illness. Overall, 67 patients (32%) screened positive for palliative care needs. Seventy percent of physicians (n = 33) found the screening tool acceptable to use and the average time of completion was 1.8 minutes per patient screened.

CONCLUSION: A rapid screen of older adults for palliative care needs was acceptable to a majority of EM physicians and identified a significant number of patients who may benefit from palliative care referral. Further research is needed to improve acceptability and determine the appropriate care pathway for patients with palliative care needs.

INTRODUCTION: Our goal was to develop and validate an index to predict in-hospital mortality in older adults after non-traumatic emergency department (ED) intubations.

METHODS: We used Vizient administrative data from hospitalizations of 22,374 adults ≥75 years who underwent non-traumatic ED intubation from 2008-2015 at nearly 300 U.S. hospitals to develop and validate an index to predict in-hospital mortality. We randomly selected one half of participants for the development cohort and one half for the validation cohort. Considering 25 potential predictors, we developed a multivariable logistic regression model using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method to determine factors associated with in-hospital mortality. We calculated risk scores using points derived from the final model's beta coefficients. To evaluate calibration and discrimination of the final model, we used Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square test and receiver-operating characteristic analysis and compared mortality by risk groups in the development and validation cohorts.

RESULTS: Death during the index hospitalization occurred in 40% of cases. The final model included six variables: history of myocardial infarction, history of cerebrovascular disease, history of metastatic cancer, age, admission diagnosis of sepsis, and admission diagnosis of stroke/ intracranial hemorrhage. Those with low-risk scores (<6) had 31% risk of in-hospital mortality while those with high-risk scores (>10) had 58% risk of in-hospital mortality. The Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square of the model was 6.47 (p=0.09), and the c-statistic was 0.62 in the validation cohort.

CONCLUSION: The model may be useful in identifying older adults at high risk of death after ED intubation.

There are relatively limited data on outcomes of screening older adults for cancer; therefore, the decision to screen older adults requires balancing the potential harms of screening and follow-up diagnostic tests with the possibility of benefit. Harms of screening can be amplified in older and frail adults and include discomfort from undergoing the test itself, anxiety, potential complications from diagnostic procedures resulting from a false-positive test, false reassurance from a false-negative test, and overdiagnosis of tumors that are of no threat and may result in overtreatment. In this paper, we review the evidence and guidelines on breast, colorectal, lung and prostate cancer as applied to older adults. We also provide a general framework for approaching cancer screening in older adults by incorporating evidence-based guidelines, patient preferences, and patient life expectancy estimates into shared screening decisions.

OBJECTIVES: Extended validation of an index predicting mortality among community-dwelling US older adults.

DESIGN/SETTING: Examination of the performance of a previously developed index in predicting 10- and 14-year mortality among respondents to the 1997-2000 National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS) using the original development and validation cohorts. Follow-up mortality data are now available through 2011.

PARTICIPANTS: 16,063 respondents from the original development cohort and 8,027 respondents from the original validation cohort. All participants were community dwelling and ≥65 years old.

MEASUREMENTS: We calculated risk scores for each respondent based on the presence or absence of 11 factors (function, illnesses, behaviors, demographics) that make up the index. Using the Kaplan Meier method, we computed 10- and 14-year mortality estimates for the development and validation cohorts to examine model calibration. We examined model discrimination using the c-index.

RESULTS: Participants in the development and validation cohorts were similar. Participants with risk scores 0-4 had 23% risk of 14-year mortality whereas respondents with risk scores (13+) had 89% risk of 14-year mortality. The c-index of the model in both cohorts was 0.73 for predicting 10-year mortality and 0.72 for predicting 14-year mortality. Overall, 18.4% of adults 65-74 years and 60.2% of adults ≥75 years have >50% risk of mortality in 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS: Our index demonstrated excellent calibration and discrimination in predicting 10- and 14-year mortality among community-dwelling US adults ≥65 years. Information on long-term prognosis is needed to help clinicians and older adults make more informed person-centered medical decisions and to help older adults plan for the future.

Purpose The benefits of annual surveillance mammography in older breast cancer survivors with limited life expectancy are not known, and there are important risks; however, little is known about mammography use among these women. Materials and Methods We used National Health Interview Study data from 2000, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2013, and 2015 to examine surveillance mammography use among women age ≥ 65 years who reported a history of breast cancer. Using multivariable logistic regression, we assessed the probability of mammography within the last 12 months by 5- and 10-year life expectancy (using the validated Schonberg index), adjusting for survey year, region, age, marital status, insurance, educational attainment, and indicators of access to care. Results Of 1,040 respondents, 33.7% were age ≥ 80 years and 88.6% were white. Approximately 8.6% and 35.1% had an estimated life expectancy of ≤ 5 and ≤ 10 years, respectively. Overall, 78.9% reported having routine surveillance mammography in the last 12 months. Receipt of mammography decreased with decreasing life expectancy ( P < .001), although 56.7% and 65.9% of those with estimated ≤ 5-year and ≤ 10-year life expectancy, respectively, reported mammography in the last year. Conversely, 14.1% of those with life expectancy > 10 years did not report mammography. In adjusted analyses, lower ( v higher) life expectancy was significantly associated with lower odds of mammography (odds ratio, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.8 for ≤ 5-year life expectancy and OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.3 to 0.6 for ≤ 10-year life expectancy). Conclusion Many (57%) older breast cancer survivors with an estimated short life expectancy (< 5 years) receive annual surveillance mammography despite unknown benefits, whereas 14% with estimated life expectancy > 10 years did not report mammography. Practice guidelines are needed to optimize and tailor follow-up care for older patients.

Older adults are at highest risk of cancer and yet have the lowest rates of cancer screening participation. Older minority adults bear the burden of cancer screening disparities leading to late stage cancer diagnoses. This investigation, utilization data from the 2008 wave of the Health and Retirement study examined the cultural and emotional factors thought to influence cervical cancer screening among older Hispanic women. We utilized logistic regression models to conduct the analyses. Findings indicate that the emotional factors were not significant but the cultural factor, time orientation was a significant predictor for older Hispanics' cervical cancer screening behaviors.

OBJECTIVES: To examine over-screening of older Israelis for colon and breast cancer.

DESIGN: Cross sectional.

SETTING: Clalit Health Services (CHS), Israel's largest health maintenance organization (HMO), provides care for more than half of the country's population and operates a national age-based programs for cancer screening.

PARTICIPANTS: All community-dwelling members aged 65 to 79 in 2014 (N = 370,876).

MEASUREMENTS: We used CHS data warehouse to evaluate cancer screening during 2014. Life expectancy (LE) was estimated using the validated Schonberg index.

RESULTS: Almost one-quarter (23.1%; 15.6% of adults aged 65-74, 42.7% of adults aged 75-79) of the study population had an estimated LE of less than 10 years. Annual fecal occult blood test and biannual mammography rates among adults aged 65 to 74 with a LE of 10 years or longer were 37.1% and 70.0%, respectively. Rates dropped after age 75 (4.0%, 19.5%) and to a lesser extent with a LE of less than 10 years (31.6%, 56.4%). Prostate-specific antigen testing is not part of the national screening program, and the proportion of people tested (42.6%), did not vary similarly with age of 75 and older (43.2%) or LE of less than 10 years (38.1%).

CONCLUSION: The cancer screening inclusion criteria of the national referral system have a strong effect on receipt of screening; LE considerations are less influential. Some method of estimating LE could be incorporated into algorithms to improve individualized cancer screening to reduce over- and underscreening of older adults.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool (BCRAT, "Gail model") is commonly used for breast cancer prediction; however, it has not been validated for women age 75 years and older.

METHODS: We used Nurses' Health Study (NHS) data beginning in 2004 and Women's Health Initiative (WHI) data beginning in 2005 to compare BCRAT's performance among women age 75 years and older with that in women age 55 to 74 years in predicting five-year breast cancer incidence. BCRAT risk factors include: age, race/ethnicity, age at menarche, age at first birth, family history, history of benign breast biopsy, and atypia. We examined BCRAT's calibration by age by comparing expected/observed (E/O) ratios of breast cancer incidence. We examined discrimination by computing c-statistics for the model by age. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS: Seventy-three thousand seventy-two NHS and 97 081 WHI women participated. NHS participants were more likely to be non-Hispanic white (96.2% vs 84.7% in WHI, P < .001) and were less likely to develop breast cancer (1.8% vs 2.0%, P = .02). E/O ratios by age in NHS were 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09 to 1.23, age 57-74 years) and 1.31 (95% CI = 1.18 to 1.45, age ≥ 75 years, P = .02), and in WHI 1.03 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.09, age 55-74 years) and 1.10 (95% CI = 1.00 to 1.21, age ≥ 75 years, P = .21). E/O ratio 95% confidence intervals crossed one among women age 75 years and older when samples were limited to women who underwent mammography and were without significant illness. C-statistics ranged between 0.56 and 0.58 in both cohorts regardless of age.

CONCLUSIONS: BCRAT accurately predicted breast cancer for women age 75 years and older who underwent mammography and were without significant illness but had modest discrimination. Models that consider individual competing risks of non-breast cancer death may improve breast cancer risk prediction for older women.