MacLaughlin, Kathy L.

Background: Understanding the accuracy of a woman's perceived breast cancer risk can enhance shared decision-making about breast cancer screening through provider and patient discussion. We aim to report and compare women's perceived lifetime breast cancer risk to calculated lifetime breast cancer risk. Methods: Women presenting to Mayo Clinic in Arizona and Minnesota in July 2016 completed a survey assessing their perceived breast cancer risk. Lifetime Gail risk scores were calculated from questions pertaining to health history and were then compared with perceived breast cancer risk. Results: A total of 550 predominantly white, married, and well-educated (≥college) women completed surveys. Using lifetime Gail risk scores, 5.6% were classified as high risk (>20% lifetime risk), 7.7% were classified as intermediate risk (15%–20%), and 86.6% were classified as average risk (<15%). Of the 27 women who were classified as high risk, 18 (66.7%) underestimated their risk and of the 37 women who were intermediate risk, 12 (32.4%) underestimated risk. Women more likely to underestimate their risk had a reported history of an abnormal mammogram and at least one or more relative with a history of breast cancer. Surveyed women tended to overestimate risk 4.3 (130/30) times as often as they underestimated risk. Conclusion: In a group of predominantly white, educated, and married cohort of women, there was a large portion of women in the elevated risk groups who underestimated risk. Specific aspects of medical history were associated with underestimation including a history of abnormal mammogram and family history of breast cancer. Overall, in our sample, more women overestimated than underestimated risk.

Executive Summary The risk of cervical cancer (CC) among women immunosuppressed for a variety of reasons is well documented in the literature. Although there is improved organ function, quality of life and life expectancy gained through use of immunosuppressant therapy, there may be increased long-term risk of cervical neoplasia and cancer and the need for more intense screening, surveillance, and management. Although guidance for CC screening among HIV-infected women (see Table 1) has been supported by evidence from retrospective and prospective studies, recommendations for CC screening among non-HIV immunosuppressed women remains limited because quality evidence is lacking. Moreover, CC screening guidelines for HIV-infected women have changed because better treatments evolved and resulted in longer life expectancy. The objective of this report was to summarize current knowledge of CC, squamous intraepithelial lesions, and human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in non-HIV immunocompromised women to determine best practices for CC surveillance in this population and provide recommendations for screening. We evaluated those with solid organ transplant, hematopoietic stem cell transplant, and a number of autoimmune diseases. A panel of health care professionals involved in CC research and care was assembled to review and discuss existing literature on the subject and come to conclusions about screening based on available evidence and expert opinion. Literature searches were performed using key words such as CC, cervical dysplasia/squamous intraepithelial lesion, HPV, and type of immunosuppression resulting in an initial group of 346 articles. Additional publications were identified from review of citations in these articles. All generated abstracts were reviewed to identify relevant articles. Articles published within 10 years were considered priority for review. Reviews of the literature were summarized with relevant statistical comparisons. Recommendations for screening generated from each group were largely based on expert opinion. Adherence to screening, health benefits and risks, and available clinical expertise were all considered in formulating the recommendations to the degree that information was available. Results Solid Organ Transplant: Evidence specific for renal, heart/lung, liver, and pancreas transplants show a consistent increase in risk of cervical neoplasia and invasive CC, demonstrating the importance of long-term surveillance and treatment. Reports demonstrate continued risk long after transplantation, emphasizing the need for screening throughout a woman's lifetime. Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant: Although there is some evidence for an increase in CC in large cohort studies of these patients, conflicting results may reflect that many patients did not survive long enough to evaluate the incidence of slow-growing or delayed-onset cancers. Furthermore, history of cervical screening or previous hysterectomy was not included in registry study analysis, possibly leading to underestimation of CC incidence rates. Genital or chronic graft versus host disease is associated with an increase in high-grade cervical neoplasia and posttransplant HPV positivity. Inflammatory Bowel Disease: There is no strong evidence to support that inflammatory bowel disease alone increases cervical neoplasia or cancer risk. In contrast, immunosuppressant therapy does seem to increase the risk, although results of observational studies are conflicting regarding which type of immunosuppressant medication increases risk. Moreover, misclassification of cases may underestimate CC risk in this population. Recently published preventive care guidelines for women with inflammatory bowel disease taking immunosuppressive therapy recommend a need for continued long-term CC screening. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis: The risk of cervical high-grade neoplasia and cancer was higher among women with systemic lupus erythematosus than those with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), although studies were limited by size, inclusion of women with low-grade neoplasia in main outcomes, and variability of disease severity or exposure to immunosuppressants. In studies designed to look specifically at immunosuppressant use, however, there did seem to be an increase in risk, identified mostly in women with RA. Although the strength of the evidence is limited, the increase in risk is consistent across studies. Type 1 DM: There is a paucity of evidence-based reports associating type 1 DM with an increased risk of cervical neoplasia and cancer. Recommendations The panel proposed that CC screening guidelines for non-HIV immunocompromised women follow either the (1) guidelines for the general population or (2) current center for disease control guidelines for HIV-infected women. The following are the summaries for each group reviewed, and more details are noted in accompanying table: Solid Organ Transplant: The transplant population reflects a greater risk of CC than the general population and guidelines for HIV-infected women are a reasonable approach for screening and surveillance. Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant: These women have a greater risk of CC than the general population and guidelines for HIV-infected women are a reasonable approach for screening. A new diagnosis of genital or chronic graft versus host disease in a woman post–stem cell transplant results in a greater risk of CC than in the general population and should result in more intensive screening and surveillance. Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Women with inflammatory bowel disease being treated with immunosuppressive drugs are at greater risk of cervical neoplasia and cancer than the general population and guidelines for HIV-infected women are a reasonable approach for screening and surveillance. Those women with inflammatory bowel disease not on immunosuppressive therapy are not at an increased risk and should follow screening guidelines for the general population. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and Rheumatoid Arthritis: All women with systemic lupus erythematosus, whether on immunosuppressant therapy or not and those women with RA on immunosuppressant therapy have a greater risk of cervical neoplasia and cancer than the general population and should follow CC screening guidelines for HIV-infected women. Women with RA not on immunosuppressant therapy should follow CC screening guidelines for the general population. Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Because of a lack of evidence of increased risk of cervical neoplasia and cancer among women with type 1 DM, these women should follow the screening guidelines for the general population.

Background: In 2012, updated cervical cancer screening recommendations were released with consensus on Papanicolaou (Pap) testing every 3 years for women age 21–65 years or Pap–human papillomavirus (HPV) cotesting at 5-year intervals for women age 30–65 years. Primary study aims: Assess current use of Pap-HPV cotesting and describe local population trends over time in Pap and Pap-HPV cotesting. Secondary aim: Assess sociodemographic factors correlating with screening. Methods: We assessed Rochester Epidemiology Project data for Pap and Pap-HPV cotesting among women age 16 years and older living in Olmsted County, Minnesota, yearly from 2005 (study population n = 47,203) through 2016 (study population n = 49,510). We calculated 3-year (Pap) and 5-year (Pap-HPV) moving prevalence rates of screening as proportion of eligible population. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess factors potentially associated with screening. Results: In 2016, 64.6% of 27,418 eligible 30- to 65-year-old women were up to date with cervical cancer screening; 60.8% had received Pap-HPV cotest screening. Significant declines in Pap completion rates over time were observed in all age groups, including an unexpected decline in 21- to 29-year-old women. Coincident with decreasing Pap screening rates, Pap-HPV cotesting significantly increased among women age 30–65 years, from 10.0% in 2007 to 60.8% in 2016. Conclusions: This suggests increasing adoption of 2012 screening recommendations in the 30- to 65-year-old population. However, decline in Pap screening among 21- to 29-year-old women is concerning. Disparities by race, ethnicity, smoking status, and comorbidity level were observed. Results suggest need for multilevel patient and clinician interventions to increase cervical cancer screening adherence.

A 62-year-old Caucasian man with past medical history significant for coronary artery disease, status post drug eluting stent to the left anterior descending artery 10 years prior, was admitted for elective total right knee arthroplasty. His intraoperative course was uneventful, and he was discharged on hospital day 2 on aspirin 325 mg twice daily for 6 weeks for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis. Three weeks later the patient developed chest pain shortly after an approximately 1-hour flight and presented to a local emergency department where computed tomography angiogram showed pulmonary emboli involving segmental and subsegmental pulmonary arteries bilaterally. He was transitioned from aspirin 325 mg twice a day to rivaroxaban 15 mg twice daily for 21 days, with a plan to transition to 20 mg daily to complete a 3-month course. He returned to his primary care physician 6 days after discharge with questions about his current anticoagulation therapy as well as the regimen he was on prior to the pulmonary embolism. Two major organizations, The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons and The American College of Chest Physicians, provide recommendations for VTE prophylaxis, but they differ regarding the preferred pharmacologic modality and duration. Although the goal is to provide optimal patient care, lack of guideline consensus may lead to different postoperative recommendations. It is important for clinicians to discuss with their patients the pharmacologic options available for VTE prophylaxis, how organizations differ in their recommendations, and the limitations of these pharmacologic agents.

Background: A clinical decision support system (CDSS) for cervical cancer screening identifies patients due for routine cervical cancer screening. Yet, high-risk patients who require more frequent screening or earlier follow-up to address past abnormal results are not identified. We aimed to assess the effect of a complex CDSS, incorporating national guidelines for high-risk patient screening and abnormal result management, its implementation to identify patients overdue for testing, and the outcome of sending a targeted recommendation for follow-up. Materials and Methods: At three primary care clinics affiliated with an academic medical center, a reminder recommending an appointment for Papanicolaou (Pap) testing or Pap and human papillomavirus cotesting was sent to high-risk women aged 18 through 65 years (intervention group) identified by CDSS as overdue for testing. Historical control patients, who did not receive a reminder, were identified by CDSS 1 year before the date when reminders were sent to the intervention group. Test completion rates were compared between the intervention and control groups through a generalized estimating equation extension. Results: Across the three sites, the average completion rate of recommended follow-up testing was significantly higher in the intervention group at 23.7% (61/257) than the completion rate at 3.3% (17/516) in the control group ( p < 0.001). Conclusions: A CDSS with enhanced capabilities to identify high-risk women due for cervical cancer testing beyond routine screening intervals, with subsequent patient notification, has the potential to decrease cervical precancer and cancer by improving adherence to guideline-compliant follow-up and needed treatment.

Background: Sexual dysfunction is common among US women of reproductive age, many of whom use contraception. Various contraceptive methods have been associated with changes in sexual function. Methods: In this narrative review, we selected key articles based on our collective clinical experience. We summarized findings and best practice recommendations for addressing a woman's contraception and its potential relationship to sexual function. Results: Although some hormonal contraception is associated with sexual dysfunction, studies show mixed results based on route of administration and progestin component. Interestingly, nonuse of contraception also appears to be associated with sexual dysfunction and dissatisfaction. Low-dose vaginal estrogen, lubricants, and moisturizers may be used for treating vaginal dryness in the setting of hypoestrogenic states in reproductive-age women. Conclusion: A review of current contraception is appropriate for women presenting with sexual health concerns. Sexual dysfunction chronologically associated with a contraceptive may be addressed by trial of an alternative method. A multidisciplinary approach to treatment is recommended, including sex therapy, pelvic floor physical therapy, and consultation with a women's health specialist as needed.

Background: Care of the gynecologic cancer survivor extends beyond cancer treatment to encompass promotion of sexual, cardiovascular, bone, and brain health; management of fertility, contraception, and vasomotor symptoms; and genetic counseling. Methods: This is a narrative review of the data and guidelines regarding care and surveillance of the gynecologic cancer survivor. We searched databases including PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus using the search terms gynecologic cancer, cancer surveillance, and cancer survivor and reached a consensus for articles chosen for inclusion in the review based on availability in the English language and publication since 2001, as well as key older articles, consensus statements, and practice guidelines from professional societies. However, we did not undertake an extensive systematic search of the literature to identify all potentially relevant studies, nor did we utilize statistical methods to summarize data. We offer clinical recommendations for the management of gynecologic cancer survivors based on review of evidence and our collective clinical experience. Results: Key messages include the limitations of laboratory studies, including CA-125, and imaging in the setting of gynecologic cancer surveillance, hormonal and non-hormonal management of treatment-related vasomotor symptoms and genitourinary syndrome of menopause, as well as recommendations for general health screening, fertility preservation, and contraception. Conclusions: A holistic approach to care extending beyond cancer treatment alone benefits gynecologic cancer survivors. In addition to surveillance for cancer recurrence and late treatment side effects, survivors benefit from guidance on hormonal, contraceptive, and fertility management and promotion of cardiovascular, bone, brain, and sexual health.