Impact of the age expansion of breast screening on screening uptake and screening outcomes among older women in BreastScreen western.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of age expansion of screening (EOS) of the target age group from 50 to 69 to 50-74 in Australia, which began mid-2013, by examining screening uptake and outcomes of older women, and by identifying factors associated with continuing screening after reaching the age of 75 years. METHODS: Retrospective study using data from women aged 65+ who attended BreastScreen Western Australia between 2010 and 2017 for free mammograms. Screening uptake and screening outcomes were calculated for the periods before (2010-2012) and after (2015-2017) the age EOS to women aged 70-74. Logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with continuing screening after reaching age 75 years, while controlling for possible confounding variables. RESULTS: Age EOS increased screening uptake amongst women aged 70-74 b y 36% and amongst women ≥75 years by 3% while screening uptake in women aged 65-69 decreased by 3%. Rate of invasive screened-detected cancers significantly decreased among women aged 70-74 from 11.4/1000 screens before to 8.1/1000 screens after age EOS. Likelihood of continuing screening into age ≥75 years was higher in women who had a personal history or a family history of breast cancer, or used hormone replacement therapy within six months of screening. Women who were born outside Australia were less likely to continue screening after reaching age 75 years. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that age EOS to women aged 70-74 was effective in increasing screening uptake in this age-group but was accompanied by a moderate increase in screening uptake amongst women ≥75 years via self-referral for whom potential benefit of screening may be limited.

Eosinopenia as a Marker of Outcome in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is a common cause of hospitalization and mortality. Recent studies have shown the usefulness of eosinopenia in predicting the outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit. This study examined the association of eosinopenia with the outcomes of patients with AECOPD. METHODS: This is a prospective study. Patients with AECOPD were divided into two cohorts: patients with eosinopenia and those without eosinopenia. Duration of hospitalization, need of mechanical ventilation, in-hospital mortality, rehospitalization, or death within 30 days after discharge were compared between the two cohorts. Eosinopenia was defined as eosinophil count of >40 cells/mm(3). RESULTS: Among 100 patients with AECOPD, 44 were eosinopenic and 56 were non-eosinopenic. Duration of hospitalization of patients with eosinopenia was 12.38 ± 9.85 days and that of patients without eosinopenia was 7.35 ± 5.68 days (p = 0.001). In all, 16 (36%) patients with eosinopenia and seven (12%) patients without eosinopenia needed mechanical ventilation (p = 0.005). In-hospital mortality rate among eosinopenic and noneosinopenic patients was 37.5% (12/44) and 7.6% (4/56), respectively (p = 0.006). Among 100 patients with AECOPD, 16 died in the hospital. Of these, 12 (27.27%) were eosinopenic and 4 (7.6%) were noneosinopenic (p = 0.006). The mean eosinophil count of patients who died in the hospital (n = 16) was 44.00 cells/ml whereas that of survivors (n = 84) was 107.41 cells/ml (p = 0.022). CONCLUSION: We conclude that a significant relationship exists between eosinopenia and outcomes of patients with AECOPD. Thus, eosinopenia can be a useful, easy-to-measure, and inexpensive biomarker for predicting the prognosis of patients with AECOPD.