SREs are a frequent complication in patients with solid tumors and bone metastases, and are much more common than previously recognized in women with BC.
Background
The effectiveness of screening colonoscopy in average-risk adults is uncertain, particularly for right colon cancers.
Objective
Examine the association between screening colonoscopy and incident late-stage colorectal cancer (CRC) risk.
Design
Nested case-control study.
Setting
Four U.S. health plans
Patients
Average-risk adults with ≥5 years of enrollment in one of the health plans (n=1,039). Cases were 55–85 years old on their diagnosis date (reference date) of stage ≥IIB (late-stage) CRC during 2006–2008. We selected 1–2 controls for each case, matched on birth year, gender, health plan, and prior enrollment duration.
Measurements
Receipt of CRC screening between 3 months and up to 10 years before the reference date, ascertained through medical record audits. We compared cases and controls on receipt of screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy using conditional logistic regressions that accounted for health history, socioeconomic status and other screening exposures.
Results
In analyses restricted to 471 eligible cases and their matched controls (n=509), 13 cases (2.8%) and 46 controls (9.0%) had undergone screening colonoscopy, which corresponded to an adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 0.30 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15–0.59) for any late-stage CRC, 0.37 (CI: 0.16–0.82) for right colon cancers, and 0.26 (CI: 0.06–1.11) for left-sided colon/rectum cancers. Ninety-two cases (19.5%) and 173 controls (34.0%) underwent screening sigmoidoscopy, corresponding to an AOR of 0.51 (CI: 0.36–0.71) overall, 0.80 (CI: 0.52–1.25) for right colon late-stage cancers, and 0.26 (CI: 0.14–0.49) for left colon/rectum cancers.
Limitations
The small number of screening colonoscopies affected the precision of our estimates.
Conclusions
Screening with colonoscopy in average-risk persons was associated with reduced risk of diagnosis with incident late-stage CRC in both the right colon and left colon/rectum. For sigmoidoscopy, this association was observed for left-sided CRC, but the association for right colon late-stage cancer was not statistically significant.
Primary Funding Source
National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.
Background: Eighteen to twenty percent of breast cancer tumors show abnormal amplification of the Human Epidermal growth factor Receptor 2 (HER2) gene and increased expression of the associated protein. HER2 amplification is associated with rapid tumor proliferation and shorter disease-free and overall survival. Because women with HER2 amplification are more likely to benefit from treatment with the drug trastuzumab, testing for HER2 is recommended to guide therapy. However, little is known about use of HER2 testing in real-world settings. This study examined uptake, use, appropriateness of HER2 testing, and the relationship between HER2 test results and treatment decisions. Methods: We assessed electronic data from 3,634 patients with invasive breast cancer diagnosed from 1998 to 2007 in a large integrated health system. We collected data on patient and tumor characteristics, HER2 testing status, test results, and trastuzumab treatment. Results:From 1998 to 2000, the percent of patients who underwent HER2 evaluation increased from 12 to 94%; <3% of women with ductal carcinoma in situ, for whom HER2 testing is not recommended, were tested. Trastuzumab use increased 5-fold after 2004, when guidelines expanded to include recommending adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer in addition to metastatic treatment. Ninety-five percent of women receiving trastuzumab had a positive HER2 result. After 2004, 55% of women with invasive breast cancer and overexpression of HER2 received trastuzumab treatment; this ranged from 44% of women with localized breast cancer to 80% of women with distant metastatic disease. Conclusions:These findings illustrate appropriate and effective implementation of a HER2 testing strategy in a managed care setting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.