Feasibility of a prototype carbon nanotube enabled stationary digital chest tomosynthesis system for identification of pulmonary nodules by pulmonologists.

Background: Screen detected and incidental pulmonary nodules are increasingly common. Current guidelines recommend tissue sampling of solid nodules >8 mm. Bronchoscopic biopsy poses the lowest risk but is paired with the lowest diagnostic yield when compared to CT-guided biopsy or surgery. A need exists for a safe, mobile, low radiation dose, intra-procedural method to localize biopsy instruments within target nodules. This retrospective cross sectional reader feasibility study evaluates the ability of clinicians to identify pulmonary nodules using a prototype carbon nanotube radiation enabled stationary digital chest tomosynthesis system. Methods: Patients with pulmonary nodules on prior CT imaging were recruited and consented for imaging with stationary digital chest tomosynthesis. Five pulmonologists of varying training levels participated as readers. Following review of patient CT and a thoracic radiologist's interpretation of nodule size and location the readers were tasked with interpreting the corresponding tomosynthesis scan to identify the same nodule found on CT. Results: Fifty-five patients were scanned with stationary digital chest tomosynthesis. The median nodule size was 6 mm (IQR =4-13 mm). Twenty nodules (37%) were greater than 8 mm. The radiation entrance dose for s-DCT was 0.6 mGy. A significant difference in identification of nodules using s-DCT was seen for nodules <8 vs. ≥8 mm in size (57.7% vs. 90.9%, CI: -0.375, -0.024; P<0.001). Inter-reader agreement was fair, and better for nodules ≥8 mm [0.278 (SE =0.043)]. Conclusions: With system and carbon nanotube array optimization, we hypothesize the detection rate for nodules will improve. Additional study is needed to evaluate its use in target and tool co-localization and target biopsy.

Population-level impact of coronavirus disease 2019 on breast cancer screening and diagnostic procedures.

BACKGROUND: To understand how health care delays may affect breast cancer detection, the authors quantified changes in breast-related preventive and diagnostic care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Eligible women (N = 39,444) were aged ≥18 years and received a screening mammogram, diagnostic mammogram, or breast biopsy between January 1, 2019 and September 30, 2020, at 7 academic and community breast imaging facilities in North Carolina. Changes in the number of mammography or breast biopsy examinations after March 3, 2020 (the first COVID-19 diagnosis in North Carolina) were evaluated and compared with the expected numbers based on trends between January 1, 2019 and March 2, 2020. Changes in the predicted mean monthly number of examinations were estimated using interrupted time series models. Differences in patient characteristics were tested using least squares means regression. RESULTS: Fewer examinations than expected were received after the pandemic's onset. Maximum reductions occurred in March 2020 for screening mammography (-85.1%; 95% CI, -100.0%, -70.0%) and diagnostic mammography (-48.9%; 95% CI, -71.7%, -26.2%) and in May 2020 for biopsies (-40.9%; 95% CI, -57.6%, -24.3%). The deficit decreased gradually, with no significant difference between observed and expected numbers by July 2020 (diagnostic mammography) and August 2020 (screening mammography and biopsy). Several months after the pandemic's onset, women who were receiving care had higher predicted breast cancer risk (screening mammography, P < .001) and more commonly lacked insurance (diagnostic mammography, P < .001; biopsy, P < .001) compared with the prepandemic population. CONCLUSIONS: Pandemic-associated deficits in the number of breast examinations decreased over time. Utilization differed by breast cancer risk and insurance status, but not by age or race/ethnicity. Long-term studies are needed to clarify the contribution of these trends to breast cancer disparities.

Availability Versus Utilization of Supplemental Breast Cancer Screening Post Passage of Breast Density Legislation.

Objective: Despite the lack of evidence that supplemental screening in women with dense breasts reduces breast cancer mortality, 38 states have passed breast density legislation, with some including recommendations for supplemental screening. The objective of this study is to compare the availability versus use of supplemental breast cancer screening modalities and determine factors driving use of supplemental screening in rural versus urban settings. Methods: A 50-item mailed survey using the Tailored Design Method was sent to American College of Radiology mammography-accredited facilities in North Carolina in 2017. Respondents included 94 facilities (48 rural and 46 urban locations). Survey questions focused on breast cancer and supplemental screening services, breast density, risk factors/assessment, and facility demographics. Results: The survey response rate was 60.3% (94/156). Among the 94 respondents, 64.0% (n = 60) reported availability of any type of supplemental screening (digital breast tomosynthesis [DBT], ultrasound, or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]). In facilities where supplemental screening modalities were available, the most commonly utilized supplemental screening modality was DBT (96.4%), compared with ultrasound (35.7%) and MRI (46.7%). Facilities reported using supplemental screening based on patient breast density (48.3%), referring physician recommendation (63.3%), reading radiologist recommendation (63.3%), breast cancer risk factors (48.3%), and patient request (40.0%). Urban facilities were more likely than rural facilities to base supplemental screening on breast cancer risk factors (62.5% vs. 32.1%; p-value = 0.019), referring physician (75.0% vs. 50.0%; p-value = 0.045), and reading radiologist (78.1% vs. 46.4%; p-value = 0.011). Conclusion: In our study, supplemental screening modalities were widely available, with facilities more likely to use DBT for supplemental screening compared to other modalities.

Understanding the response of mammography facilities to breast density notification.

BACKGROUND: State-specific breast density notification legislation requires that women undergoing mammography be informed about breast density, with variation among states. Because mammography facilities are among the main points of contact for women undergoing mammography, research is needed to understand how facilities communicate information on breast density, cancer risk, and supplemental screening to women. METHODS: A cross-sectional, 50-item, mailed survey of 156 American College of Radiology-certified mammography facilities in North Carolina was conducted in 2017 via the Tailored Design Method. Breast density notification practices, supplemental screening services, and patient educational materials were compared by supplemental screening availability via t tests and chi-square tests. RESULTS: All responding facilities (n = 94; 60.3% response rate) notified women of their breast density in the mammography results letter. Breast cancer risk assessments were performed by 36.2% of the facilities, with risk information communicated in the final radiology report for the referring provider to discuss with the woman (79.4%) or in the results letter (58.8%). Supplemental breast cancer screening was offered by 63.8% of the facilities, with use based on multiple factors, including recommendations from the referring physician (63.3%) or reading radiologist (63.3%), breast density (48.3%), other risk factors (48.3%), and patient request (40.0%). Although 75.0% of the facilities offered breast density educational materials, only 36.6% offered educational materials on supplemental screening. CONCLUSIONS: In a state with a breast density notification law, mammography facilities communicate breast density, cancer risk, and supplemental screening information to women through various approaches. When supplemental screening is offered, facilities use multiple decision-making criteria rather than breast density alone.

On Examining the Quality of Spanish Translation in Telephone Surveys: A Novel Test-Retest Approach.

Past research has shown that commonly reported cultural group disparities in health-related indices may be attributable to culturally mediated differences in the interpretation of translated survey questions and response scales. This problem may be exacerbated when administering single-item survey questions, which typically lack the reliability seen in multi-item scales. We adapt the test-retest approach for single-item survey questions that have been translated from English into Spanish and demonstrate how to use this approach as a quick and efficient pilot test before fielding a major survey. Three retest conditions were implemented (English-Spanish, Spanish-English, and English-English) on a convenience sample (n = 109) of Latinos and non-Latinos where translated items were compared against an English-English condition that served as our control. Several items were flagged for investigation using this approach. Discussion centers on the utility of this approach for evaluating the Spanish translation of single-item questions in population-based surveys.

Opinions and Practices of Lung Cancer Screening by Physician Specialty.

BACKGROUND In response to the National Lung Screening Trial, numerous professional organizations published guidelines recommending annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for high-risk patients. Prior studies found that physician attitudes and knowledge about lung cancer screening directly impacts the number of screening exams ordered.METHODS In 2015, we surveyed 34 pulmonologists and 186 primary care providers (PCPs) to evaluate opinions and practices of lung cancer screening in a large academic medical center. We compared PCP and pulmonologist responses using t-tests and χ2 tests.RESULTS The overall survey response rate was 40% (39% for PCPs and 50% for pulmonologists). Pulmonologists were more likely than PCPs to report lung cancer screening as beneficial for patients (88.2% versus 37.7%, P < .0001) and as being cost-effective (47.1% versus 14.3%, P = .02). More pulmonologists (76%) reported ordering a LDCT for screening in the past 12 months compared to PCPs (41%, P = .012). Pulmonologists and PCPs reported similar barriers to referring patients for lung cancer screening, including patient costs (82.4% versus 77.8%), potential for emotional harm (58.8% versus 58.3%), high false positive rate (47.1% versus 69.4%), and likelihood for medical complications (47.1% versus 59.7%).LIMITATIONS Our results are generalizable to academic medical centers and responses may be susceptible to recall bias, non-response bias, and social desirability bias.CONCLUSION We found significant differences in opinions and practices between PCPs and pulmonologists regarding lung cancer screening referrals and perceived benefits. As lung cancer screening continues to emerge in clinical practice, it is important to understand these differences across provider specialty to ensure screening is implemented and offered to patients appropriately.

Opinions, practice patterns, and perceived barriers to lung cancer screening among attending and resident primary care physicians.

INTRODUCTION: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommended annual lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) for high-risk patients in December 2013. We compared lung cancer screening-related opinions and practices among attending and resident primary care physicians (PCPs). METHODS: In 2015, we conducted a 23-item survey among physicians at a large academic medical center. We surveyed 100 resident PCPs (30% response rate) and 86 attending PCPs (49% response rate) in Family Medicine and Internal Medicine. The questions focused on physicians' opinions, knowledge of recommendations, self-reported practice patterns, and barriers to lung cancer screening. In 2015 and 2016, we compared responses among attending versus resident PCPs using chi-square/Fisher's exact tests and 2-samples t-tests. RESULTS: Compared with resident PCPs, attending PCPs were older (mean age =47 vs 30 years) and more likely to be male (54% vs 37%). Over half of both groups concurred that inconsistent recommendations make deciding whether or not to screen difficult. A substantial proportion in both groups indicated that they were undecided about the benefit of lung cancer screening for patients (43% attending PCPs and 55% resident PCPs). The majority of attending and resident PCPs agreed that barriers to screening included limited time during patient visits (62% and 78%, respectively), cost to patients (74% and 83%, respectively), potential for complications (53% and 70%, respectively), and a high false-positive rate (67% and 73%, respectively). CONCLUSION: There was no evidence to suggest that attending and resident PCPs had differing opinions about lung cancer screening. For population-based implementation of lung cancer screening, physicians and trainees will need resources and time to address the benefits and harms with their patients.

The association between mammographic calcifications and breast cancer prognostic factors in a population-based registry cohort.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic calcifications can be a marker of malignancy, but their association with prognosis is less well established. In the current study, the authors examined the relationship between calcifications and breast cancer prognostic factors in the population-based Carolina Mammography Registry. METHODS: The current study included 8472 invasive breast cancers diagnosed in the Carolina Mammography Registry between 1996 and 2011 for which information regarding calcifications occurring within 2 years of diagnosis was reported. Calcification-specific Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessments were reported prospectively by a radiologist. Tumor characteristic data were obtained from the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry and/or pathology reports. Multivariable-adjusted associations between the presence of calcifications in the breast affected by cancer and tumor characteristics were estimated using logistic regression. Statistical tests were 2-sided. RESULTS: The presence of calcifications was found to be positively associated with tumors that were high grade (vs low grade: odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.10-1.88) or had an in situ component (vs without: OR, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.81-2.55). Calcifications were found to be inversely associated with hormone receptor-negative status (vs positive status: OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.57-0.93), size >35 mm (vs ≤8 mm: OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37-0.61), and lobular tumors (vs ductal: OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22-0.69). The association between the presence of calcifications and an in situ component was limited to BI-RADS category 4 and 5 calcifications and was absent for BI-RADS category 2 or 3 calcifications (P for heterogeneity <.01). The association with tumor size was found to be strongest for BI-RADS categories 3 and 4 (P for heterogeneity <.01). CONCLUSIONS: Calcifications were found to be associated with both unfavorable (high grade) and favorable (small size, hormone receptor positivity) prognostic factors. Detailed analysis of the biological features of calcifications is necessary to understand the mechanisms driving these associations. Cancer 2017;123:219-227. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Examining explanations for the link between bullying perpetration and physical dating violence perpetration: Do they vary by bullying victimization?

This short-term longitudinal study examined whether the association between bullying perpetration and later physical dating violence perpetration and mediators of that association (via anger, depression, anxiety, and social status), varied depending on level of bullying victimization. Differences have been noted between those who bully but are not victims of bullying, and those who are both bullies and victims. These differences may influence dating violence risk and the explanations for why bullying leads to dating violence. Data were from dating adolescents in three rural counties who completed self-administered questionnaires in the fall semester of grades 8-10 and again in the spring semester. The sample (N = 2,414) was 44.08% male and 61.31% white. Bullying perpetration in the fall semester predicted physical dating violence perpetration in the spring semester when there was no bullying victimization, but not when there was any bullying victimization. Bullying perpetration was positively associated with anger at all levels of bullying victimization and with social status when there was no or low amounts of victimization; it was negatively associated with social status at high levels of victimization. Bullying victimization was positively associated with anger, depression, and anxiety at all levels of bullying perpetration. Anger mediated the association between bullying perpetration and dating violence, regardless of level of victimization; depression, anxiety, and social status did not mediate the association at any level of bullying victimization. The findings have implications for dating violence prevention efforts and for future research on the link between bullying and dating violence.

Self-regulatory failure and the perpetration of adolescent dating violence: Examining an alcohol use by gene explanation.

Studies report that alcohol use is related to partner violence, but for many, alcohol use does not culminate in violence against partners. Guided by a self-regulatory failure framework, we predicted that alcohol use would be more strongly associated with dating violence perpetration among adolescents with genotypes linked to impulsivity and emotional reactivity. The hypothesis was tested using random coefficient modeling of data from a multi-wave longitudinal study spanning grades 8-12 (ages 13-18) (n = 1,475). Analyses adjusted for multiple testing and race, and the potential for gene by environment correlation was examined. As predicted, alcohol use was more strongly associated with dating violence among adolescents who had a high rather than a low multilocus genetic profile composed of five genetic markers that influence dopamine signaling. Alcohol use was more strongly related to dating violence among boys with long rather than short 5-HTTLPR alleles, the opposite of the prediction. MAOA-uVNTR did not interact with alcohol, but it had a main effect on dating violence by boys in later grades in the expected direction: boys with more low activity alleles perpetrated more dating violence. Exploratory analyses found variation in findings by race. Our findings demonstrate the importance of incorporating genes into etiological studies of adolescent dating violence, which to date has not been done. Aggr. Behav. Aggr. Behav. 42:189-203, 2015. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The peer context and the development of the perpetration of adolescent dating violence.

The peer context is a central focus in research on adolescent risk behaviors but few studies have investigated the role of the peer context in the perpetration of adolescent dating violence. This longitudinal study examined between-subjects and within-person contemporaneous and lagged effects of peer attributes, measured with social network analyses, on trajectories of dating violence perpetration and determined if effects varied by grade and/or sex of the adolescent. Data are from adolescents who participated in a five-wave panel study beginning when they were in 7 through 9th grade and ending when they were in 10 through 12th grade (n = 3,412); half were male, 40.5 % were white, 49.9 % were black and 10.4 % were of another race/ethnicity. Significant between-subjects effects indicate that adolescents who typically have friends who use dating violence, and girls who are typically high in social status, are at increased risk for using dating violence throughout adolescence. Adolescents who typically have high quality friendships and girls who typically have friends with pro-social beliefs are at decreased risk for using dating violence throughout adolescence. Significant within-person contemporaneous effects indicate that both boys and girls reported lower levels of dating violence than usual at times when they had more friends with pro-social beliefs, and reported higher levels of dating violence than usual at times when they had higher social status. None of the lagged effects were significant and none of the effects varied across grade. These findings suggest that the peer context plays an important role in the development of the perpetration of adolescent dating violence.

Risk and protective factors distinguishing profiles of adolescent peer and dating violence perpetration.

PURPOSE: Violence profiles were created on the basis of whether adolescents used violence against both peers and dates, against dates but not peers, against peers but not dates, or against neither peers nor dates. We determined (1) whether risk and protective factors from five domains (individual attributes and behaviors, the peer, family, school, and neighborhood contexts), based primarily on social learning and social control theories, were associated with violence profiles, (2) whether factors distinguishing profiles varied by gender, and (3) which of the domains was most important in distinguishing profiles. METHODS: Data are from adolescents in grades 8 through 10 from schools in three nonmetropolitan Counties (n = 2,907). RESULTS: Adolescents who used violence against both peers and dates used more of each type of violence compared with those who used only one type of violence. They also had more maladaptive risk and protective scores than adolescents perpetrating only peer violence or neither type of violence, although they had few differences from those perpetrating only dating violence. Most social learning theory risk factors and social control theory protective factors distinguished the profiles as did psychological attributes and substance use. Factors distinguishing profile membership were generally the same for boys and girls, although some associations were stronger for boys than for girls. The model fit statistics suggest that the individual attributes and behaviors and the peer context models fit the data the best. CONCLUSIONS: Suggestions for developing theoretically based interventions for preventing both peer and dating violence are presented.

What accounts for demographic differences in trajectories of adolescent dating violence? An examination of intrapersonal and contextual mediators.

PURPOSE: To identify intrapersonal and contextual factors that mediate associations between demographic variables (minority status, socioeconomic status, family structure, gender, and neighborhood disadvantage) and trajectories of moderate and severe physical dating violence perpetration from ages 13-19 years. METHODS: Multi-wave data from 959 adolescents were analyzed using formal mediation analysis in a multilevel analytical framework. RESULTS: Gender and neighborhood disadvantage were not associated with trajectories of dating violence, and therefore mediation was not examined for those variables. At all ages, minority adolescents reported perpetrating significantly more moderate and severe physical dating violence than non-minority adolescents. Destructive communication skills, acceptance of dating abuse, gender stereotyping, and exposure to family violence significantly mediated those associations. Parental education was significantly negatively associated with moderate physical dating violence. Acceptance of dating abuse, gender stereotyping, and exposure to family violence significantly mediated that association. At all ages, adolescents from single-parent households perpetrated significantly more severe physical dating violence than adolescents from two-parent households, but no variables mediated that association. CONCLUSIONS: Each of the identified mediating variables is amenable to change through interventions targeted at high-risk subgroups of adolescents identified by these demographic characteristics.