Men's knowledge and attitudes about cervical cancer screening in Kenya.

BACKGROUND: A number of studies have identified male involvement as an important factor affecting reproductive health outcomes, particularly in the areas of family planning, antenatal care, and HIV care. As access to cervical cancer screening programs improves in resource-poor settings, particularly through the integration of HIV and cervical cancer services, it is important to understand the role of male partner support in women's utilization of screening and treatment. METHODS: We administered an oral survey to 110 men in Western Kenya about their knowledge and attitudes regarding cervical cancer and cervical cancer screening. Men who had female partners eligible for cervical cancer screening were recruited from government health facilities where screening was offered free of charge. RESULTS: Specific knowledge about cervical cancer risk factors, prevention, and treatment was low. Only half of the men perceived their partners to be at risk for cervical cancer, and many reported that a positive screen would be emotionally upsetting. Nevertheless, all participants said they would encourage their partners to get screened. CONCLUSIONS: Future interventions should tailor cervical cancer educational opportunities towards men. Further research is needed among both men and couples to better understand barriers to male support for screening and treatment and to determine how to best involve men in cervical cancer prevention efforts.

Anti-cholinergic load, health care utilization, and survival in people with advanced cancer: a pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-cholinergic medications have been associated with increased risks of cognitive impairment, premature mortality and increased risk of hospitalisation. Anti-cholinergic load associated with medication increases as death approaches in those with advanced cancer, yet little is known about associated adverse outcomes in this setting. METHODS: A substudy of 112 participants in a randomised control trial who had cancer and an Australia modified Karnofsky Performance Scale (AKPS) score (AKPS) of 60 or above, explored survival and health service utilisation; with anti-cholinergic load calculated using the Clinician Rated Anti-cholinergic Scale (modified version) longitudinally to death. A standardised starting point for prospectively calculating survival was an AKPS of 60 or above. RESULTS: Baseline entry to the sub-study was a mean 62 +/- 81 days (median 37, range 1-588) days before death (survival), with mean of 4.8 (median 3, SD 4.18, range 1 - 24) study assessments in this time period. Participants spent 22% of time as an inpatient. There was no significant association between anti-cholinergic score and time spent as an inpatient (adjusted for survival time) (p = 0.94); or survival time. DISCUSSION: No association between anti-cholinergic load and survival or time spent as an inpatient was seen. Future studies need to include cognitively impaired populations where the risks of symptomatic deterioration may be more substantial.

Variation in use of surveillance colonoscopy among colorectal cancer survivors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines recommend colonoscopies at regular intervals for colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors. Using data from a large, multi-regional, population-based cohort, we describe the rate of surveillance colonoscopy and its association with geographic, sociodemographic, clinical, and health services characteristics. METHODS: We studied CRC survivors enrolled in the Cancer Care Outcomes Research and Surveillance (CanCORS) study. Eligible survivors were diagnosed between 2003 and 2005, had curative surgery for CRC, and were alive without recurrences 14 months after surgery with curative intent. Data came from patient interviews and medical record abstraction. We used a multivariate logit model to identify predictors of colonoscopy use. RESULTS: Despite guidelines recommending surveillance, only 49% of the 1423 eligible survivors received a colonoscopy within 14 months after surgery. We observed large regional differences (38% to 57%) across regions. Survivors who received screening colonoscopy were more likely to: have colon cancer than rectal cancer (OR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.05-1.90); have visited a primary care physician (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14-1.82); and received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR = 1.75, 95% CI: 1.27-2.41). Compared to survivors with no comorbidities, survivors with moderate or severe comorbidities were less likely to receive surveillance colonoscopy (OR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.98 and OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.29-0.66, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Despite guidelines, more than half of CRC survivors did not receive surveillance colonoscopy within 14 months of surgery, with substantial variation by site of care. The association of primary care visits and adjuvant chemotherapy use suggests that access to care following surgery affects cancer surveillance.

Barriers and Facilitators to Adoption of Genomic Services for Colorectal Care within the Veterans Health Administration.

We examined facilitators and barriers to adoption of genomic services for colorectal care, one of the first genomic medicine applications, within the Veterans Health Administration to shed light on areas for practice change. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 58 clinicians to understand use of the following genomic services for colorectal care: family health history documentation, molecular and genetic testing, and genetic counseling. Data collection and analysis were informed by two conceptual frameworks, the Greenhalgh Diffusion of Innovation and Andersen Behavioral Model, to allow for concurrent examination of both access and innovation factors. Specialists were more likely than primary care clinicians to obtain family history to investigate hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC), but with limited detail; clinicians suggested templates to facilitate retrieval and documentation of family history according to guidelines. Clinicians identified advantage of molecular tumor analysis prior to genetic testing, but tumor testing was infrequently used due to perceived low disease burden. Support from genetic counselors was regarded as facilitative for considering hereditary basis of CRC diagnosis, but there was variability in awareness of and access to this expertise. Our data suggest the need for tools and policies to establish and disseminate well-defined processes for accessing services and adhering to guidelines.

A randomized trial comparing the diagnostic accuracy of visual inspection with acetic acid to Visual Inspection with Lugol's Iodine for cervical cancer screening in HIV-infected women.

Visual inspection with Acetic Acid (VIA) and Visual Inspection with Lugol’s Iodine (VILI) are increasingly recommended in various cervical cancer screening protocols in low-resource settings. Although VIA is more widely used, VILI has been advocated as an easier and more specific screening test. VILI has not been well-validated as a stand-alone screening test, compared to VIA or validated for use in HIV-infected women. We carried out a randomized clinical trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of VIA and VILI among HIV-infected women. Women attending the Family AIDS Care and Education Services (FACES) clinic in western Kenya were enrolled and randomized to undergo either VIA or VILI with colposcopy. Lesions suspicious for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or greater (CIN2+) were biopsied. Between October 2011 and June 2012, 654 were randomized to undergo VIA or VILI. The test positivity rates were 26.2% for VIA and 30.6% for VILI (p = 0.22). The rate of detection of CIN2+ was 7.7% in the VIA arm and 11.5% in the VILI arm (p = 0.10). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic performance of VIA and VILI for the detection of CIN2+. Sensitivity and specificity were 84.0% and 78.6%, respectively, for VIA and 84.2% and 76.4% for VILI. The positive and negative predictive values were 24.7% and 98.3% for VIA, and 31.7% and 97.4% for VILI. Among women with CD4+ count < 350, VILI had a significantly decreased specificity (66.2%) compared to VIA in the same group (83.9%, p = 0.02) and compared to VILI performed among women with CD4+ count ≥ 350 (79.7%, p = 0.02). VIA and VILI had similar diagnostic accuracy and rates of CIN2+ detection among HIV-infected women.

Prostate cancer screening

Universal screening for prostate cancer (Pca) using prostate-specific antigen-based testing is not recommended, as the potential harms of screening (overdiagnosis and overtreatment) outweigh potential benefits. The case for Pca screening requires a paradigm shift, which emphasizes the risks of screening over the risks of undetected cancer. Physicians are encouraged to use shared decision making with patients who express an interest in Pca screening, taking into account both the patient's screening preferences and individual risk profile. New models of care informed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act are intended to assist clinicians in providing recommended preventive services. © 2014 Elsevier Inc.