Explore the vast range of titles available.

Menopause is the time of life when menstrual cycles cease, and is caused by reduced secretion of the ovarian hormones oestrogen and progesterone. Although menopause is a normal event for women, individual experiences vary, and some women seek medical advice for the management of symptoms. Many symptoms have been attributed to menopause, but only vasomotor dysfunction and vaginal dryness are consistently associated with this time of life in epidemiological studies. Other common symptoms such as mood changes, sleep disturbances, urinary incontinence, cognitive changes, somatic complaints, sexual dysfunction, and reduced quality of life may be secondary to other symptoms, or related to other causes. Trials of therapies for vasomotor dysfunction have shown improvements with oestrogen, gabapentin, paroxetine, and clonidine, but little or no benefit with other agents; adverse effects of these treatments must also be considered. Many questions about menopausal transition and its effects on health have not been adequately addressed.

BackgroundThis study evaluates the effectiveness of patient navigation to increase screening for colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer in populations adversely affected by health care disparities.MethodsEligible studies were identified through English-language searches of Ovid® MEDLINE®, PsycINFO®, SocINDEX, and Veterans Affairs Health Services database (January 1, 1996, to July 5, 2019) and manual review of reference lists. Randomized trials and observational studies of relevant populations that evaluated the effectiveness of patient navigation on screening rates for colorectal, breast, or cervical cancer compared with usual or alternative care comparison groups were included. Two investigators independently abstracted study data and assessed study quality and applicability using criteria adapted from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third reviewer. Results were combined using profile likelihood random effects models.ResultsThirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria (28 colorectal, 11 breast, 4 cervical cancers including 3 trials with multiple cancer types). Screening rates were higher with patient navigation for colorectal cancer overall (risk ratio [RR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42 to 1.92; I2 = 93.7%; 22 trials) and by type of test (fecal occult blood or immunohistochemistry testing [RR 1.69; 95% CI 1.33 to 2.15; I2 = 80.5%; 6 trials]; colonoscopy/endoscopy [RR 2.08; 95% CI 1.08 to 4.56; I2 = 94.6%; 6 trials]). Screening was also higher with navigation for breast cancer (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; I2 = 98.6%; 10 trials) and cervical cancer (RR 1.11; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19; based on the largest trial). The high heterogeneity of cervical cancer studies prohibited meta-analysis. Results were similar for colorectal and breast cancer regardless of prior adherence to screening guidelines, follow-up time, and study quality.ConclusionsIn populations adversely affected by disparities, colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening rates were higher in patients provided navigation services.Registration: PROSPERO: CRD42018109263

Objective To quantify the accuracy and reproducibility of pathologists’ diagnoses of melanocytic skin lesions.Design Observer accuracy and reproducibility study.Setting 10 US states.Participants Skin biopsy cases (n=240), grouped into sets of 36 or 48. Pathologists from 10 US states were randomized to independently interpret the same set on two occasions (phases 1 and 2), at least eight months apart.Main outcome measures Pathologists’ interpretations were condensed into five classes: I (eg, nevus or mild atypia); II (eg, moderate atypia); III (eg, severe atypia or melanoma in situ); IV (eg, pathologic stage T1a (pT1a) early invasive melanoma); and V (eg, ≥pT1b invasive melanoma). Reproducibility was assessed by intraobserver and interobserver concordance rates, and accuracy by concordance with three reference diagnoses.Results In phase 1, 187 pathologists completed 8976 independent case interpretations resulting in an average of 10 (SD 4) different diagnostic terms applied to each case. Among pathologists interpreting the same cases in both phases, when pathologists diagnosed a case as class I or class V during phase 1, they gave the same diagnosis in phase 2 for the majority of cases (class I 76.7%; class V 82.6%). However, the intraobserver reproducibility was lower for cases interpreted as class II (35.2%), class III (59.5%), and class IV (63.2%). Average interobserver concordance rates were lower, but with similar trends. Accuracy using a consensus diagnosis of experienced pathologists as reference varied by class: I, 92% (95% confidence interval 90% to 94%); II, 25% (22% to 28%); III, 40% (37% to 44%); IV, 43% (39% to 46%); and V, 72% (69% to 75%). It is estimated that at a population level, 82.8% (81.0% to 84.5%) of melanocytic skin biopsy diagnoses would have their diagnosis verified if reviewed by a consensus reference panel of experienced pathologists, with 8.0% (6.2% to 9.9%) of cases overinterpreted by the initial pathologist and 9.2% (8.8% to 9.6%) underinterpreted.Conclusion Diagnoses spanning moderately dysplastic nevi to early stage invasive melanoma were neither reproducible nor accurate in this large study of pathologists in the USA. Efforts to improve clinical practice should include using a standardized classification system, acknowledging uncertainty in pathology reports, and developing tools such as molecular markers to support pathologists’ visual assessments.

Telehealth delivery of preventive health services may improve access to care; however, its effectiveness and adverse effects are unknown. We conducted a comparative effectiveness review on the effectiveness and harms of telehealth interventions for women's reproductive health and intimate partner violence (IPV) services. We searched MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus for English-language studies (July 2016 to May 2022) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies of telehealth strategies for women's reproductive health and IPV versus usual care. Two investigators identified studies and abstracted data using a predefined protocol. Study quality was assessed using study design-specific standardized methods; disagreements were resolved through consensus. Eight RCTs, 1 nonrandomized trial, and 7 observational studies (n=10 731) were included (7 studies of contraceptive care and 9 of IPV services). Telehealth interventions to supplement contraceptive care demonstrated similar rates as usual care for contraceptive use, sexually transmitted infections, and pregnancy (low strength of evidence [SOE]); evidence on abortion was insufficient. Outcomes were also similar between telehealth interventions to replace or supplement IPV services and comparators for repeat IPV, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, fear of partner, coercive control, self-efficacy, and safety behaviors (low SOE). In these studies, telehealth barriers included limited internet access, digital literacy, technical challenges, and confidentiality concerns. Strategies to ensure safety increased telehealth use for IPV services. Evidence on access, health equity, or harms was lacking. Telehealth interventions for contraceptive care and IPV services demonstrate equivalent clinical and patient-reported outcomes versus in-person care, although few studies are available. Effective approaches for delivering these services and how to best mobilize telehealth, particularly for women facing barriers to care remain uncertain. PROSPERO CRD42021282298.

Presented by the American College of Surgeons and the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology, the first comprehensive, evidence-based examination of cancer surgery techniques as standards distills the well-defined protocols and techniques that are critical to achieve optimal outcomes in a cancer operation. This unique, one of a kind collaboration between the American College of Surgeons and the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology focuses on best practices and state-of-the-art methodologies. Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery clearly describes the surgical activities that occur between skin incision and skin closure that directly affect cancer outcomes.

Practice recommendations for mammography screening were issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2009 and expansion of insurance coverage was provided under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act soon thereafter, yet the influence of these changes on screening practices in the United States is not known. To determine changes in mammography screening and their associations with new practice recommendations and the Affordable Care Act, we examined patient-level data from 249,803 screening mammograms from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2012 in a large community-based health system in the northwestern United States. Associations were determined by an intervention analysis of time-series data method. Among women screened, 64% were age 50-74 years; 84% self-identified as white race; 62% had commercial insurance; and 70% were seen in facilities located in metropolitan areas. Practice recommendations were associated with decreased screening volumes among women age <40 (-37.4 mammograms/month; -39.4% change; P<0.001), 40-49 (-106.0 mammograms/month; -11.2% change; P<0.001), and ≥75 (-54.7 mammograms/month; -10.0% change; P<0.001), but not women age 50-74. Implementation of the Affordable Care Act was associated with increased screening among women age 50-74 (+184.3 mammograms/month; +7.2% change; P=0.001), but not women <40 or ≥75; increases for age 40-49 were of borderline statistical significance (+56.9 mammograms/month; +6% change; P=0.06). Practice recommendations were also associated with decreased screening for women with commercial insurance, while the Affordable Care Act was associated with increased screening for women with Medicare, Medicaid, or other noncommercial sources of payment. Mammography screening volumes in a large community health system decreased among women age <50 and ≥75 in association with new U.S. Preventive Services Task Force practice recommendations, while insurance coverage changes under the Affordable Care Act were associated with increased screening volumes among women age 50-74.

High rates of surgical breast biopsies in community hospitals have been reported but may misrepresent actual practice. Patient-level data from 5,757 women who underwent breast biopsies in a large integrated health system were evaluated to determine biopsy types, rates, indications, and diagnoses. Between 2008 and 2010, 6,047 breast biopsies were performed on 5,757 women. Surgical biopsy was the initial diagnostic procedure in 16% (n = 942) of women overall and in 6% (72 of 1,236) of women with newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer. Invasive breast cancer was diagnosed in 72 women (8%) undergoing surgical biopsy compared with 1,164 (24%) undergoing core needle biopsy (P < .001, age adjusted). Main indications for surgical biopsies included symptomatic abnormalities, technical challenges, and patient choice. Surgical biopsy was the initial diagnostic procedure in 16% of women with breast abnormalities, comparable with rates at academic centers. Rates could be improved by more careful consideration of indications.

Background: Digital whole slide imaging may be useful for obtaining second opinions and is used in many countries. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires verification studies. Methods: Pathologists were randomized to interpret one of four sets of breast biopsy cases during two phases, separated by ≥9 months, using glass slides or digital format (sixty cases per set, one slide per case, n = 240 cases). Accuracy was assessed by comparing interpretations to a consensus reference standard. Intraobserver reproducibility was assessed by comparing the agreement of interpretations on the same cases between two phases. Estimated probabilities of confirmation by a reference panel (i.e., predictive values) were obtained by incorporating data on the population prevalence of diagnoses. Results: Sixty-five percent of responding pathologists were eligible, and 252 consented to randomization; 208 completed Phase I (115 glass, 93 digital); and 172 completed Phase II (86 glass, 86 digital). Accuracy was slightly higher using glass compared to digital format and varied by category: invasive carcinoma, 96% versus 93% (P = 0.04); ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 84% versus 79% (P < 0.01); atypia, 48% versus 43% (P = 0.08); and benign without atypia, 87% versus 82% (P < 0.01). There was a small decrease in intraobserver agreement when the format changed compared to when glass slides were used in both phases (P = 0.08). Predictive values for confirmation by a reference panel using glass versus digital were: invasive carcinoma, 98% and 97% (not significant [NS]); DCIS, 70% and 57% (P = 0.007); atypia, 38% and 28% (P = 0.002); and benign without atypia, 97% and 96% (NS). Conclusions: In this large randomized study, digital format interpretations were similar to glass slide interpretations of benign and invasive cancer cases. However, cases in the middle of the spectrum, where more inherent variability exists, may be more problematic in digital format. Future studies evaluating the effect these findings exert on clinical practice and patient outcomes are required.

Clinically significant mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are associated with increased susceptibility for breast and ovarian cancer. Although these mutations are uncommon, public interest in testing for them is growing. To determine benefits and harms of screening for inherited breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility in the general population of women without cancer presenting for primary health care in the United States. MEDLINE (1966 to 1 October 2004), Cochrane Library databases, reference lists, reviews, Web sites, and experts. Eligibility was determined by inclusion criteria specific to key questions about risk assessment, genetic counseling, mutation testing, prevention interventions, and potential adverse effects. After review of studies, data were extracted, entered into evidence tables, and summarized by using descriptive or statistical methods. Study quality was rated by using predefined criteria. Tools assessing risks for mutations and referral guidelines have been developed; their accuracy, effectiveness, and adverse effects in primary care settings are unknown. Risk assessment, genetic counseling, and mutation testing did not cause adverse psychological outcomes, and counseling improved distress and risk perception in the highly selected populations studied. Intensive cancer screening studies are inconclusive. Chemoprevention trials indicate risk reduction for breast cancer in women with varying levels of risk, as well as increased adverse effects. Observational studies of prophylactic surgeries report reduced risks for breast and ovarian cancer in mutation carriers. No data describe the range of risk associated with BRCA mutations, genetic heterogeneity, and moderating factors; studies conducted in highly selected populations contain biases; and information on adverse effects is incomplete. A primary care approach to screening for inherited breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility has not been evaluated, and evidence is lacking to determine benefits and harms for the general population.