A historical perspective on breast cancer activism in the United States: from education and support to partnership in scientific research.

Breast cancer remained a hidden disease among women in the United States until the 20th century. It was initially brought into the open with public revelations from individual women, which was followed by the development of support groups and ultimately the formation of political activist groups with various priorities. Those concerned with toxic environmental exposures as a potential cause of breast cancer organized, demonstrated, and lobbied for research funding and eventually became partners in the research that arose from their efforts. One representative example was the Breast Cancer and Environment Research Centers (BCERC) Project (2003-2010), supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The BCERC embedded a Community Outreach and Translational Core into its formal organizational infrastructure to ensure advocate involvement in the standing scientific subcommittees of BCERC, the first project funded by NIEHS and NCI to do so. The formal integration of advocates as partners in scientific studies focused on breast cancer is embedded in a rich history of action on the part of many courageous women. This article describes the historical evolution of breast cancer activism in the United States, which provided a critical foundation for the formation of BCERC. This description is followed by a discussion of BCERC as an example of the transdisciplinary research model, a paradigm that strives for inclusion of multiple stakeholders and increased interaction between scientists from a wide spectrum of disciplines, advocates, and lay audiences in order to more effectively conduct critical research and to translate and disseminate its findings.

Sharing unexpected biomarker results with study participants.

BACKGROUND: The Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Centers (BCERCs) include collaborators from basic sciences, epidemiology, and the community, conducting studies to investigate whether environmental exposures are associated with the timing of puberty. A pilot study of a subset of the study participants assessed the feasibility of measuring selected biomarkers of exposure in blood and urine in girls 6-8 years of age. In the Greater Cincinnati study population, we found an elevated serum concentration of perfluorooctanoate (PFOA) among > 90% of young girls living in a small community. OBJECTIVES: The research team deliberated whether and how to report the PFOA findings to our study families. We will address the issues considered in our decision, as well as the formats we used to present the findings. METHODS: The results were verified as we searched for potential sources of the elevated PFOA levels. As a research team, we grappled with issues regarding the reporting of unexpected results, derived from unknown sources and with unknown clinical significance. Ultimately, we did decide to present these findings to the study families through a well-developed communication plan. DISCUSSION: Research team members came from a variety of experiences and backgrounds, which led to different interpretations about the clinical, ethical, and public health issues surrounding these findings. The ethical debates centered around the precautionary principle, the right to know, and do no harm. CONCLUSIONS: Given advances in environmental biomarker technologies and greater use of the transdisciplinary research model, a communication plan must be developed for those involved as study participants.