OBJECTIVE: To assess effects on breast cancer risk of exposure to both oral contraceptives and menopausal hormones, an increasingly common exposure. DESIGN: A case-control study of breast cancer among women under the age of 55 years in Atlanta, GA involving 1,031 cases and 919 population controls was conducted. RESULTS: Ever use of oral contraceptives was associated with a relative risk of 1.1 (95% 0.9-1.4), whereas the relative risk for hormone replacement therapy was 0.9 (95% CI 0.7-1.2). Seventeen percent of the cases versus 19% of the population controls reported exposure to both agents, resulting in a relative risk of 1.0 (95% CI 0.7-1.4) relative to those unexposed to either preparation. Although there was little variation in risk associated with joint effects by either age or race, there were statistically nonsignificant elevations in risk for this exposure among women who had experienced a natural menopause (relative risk = 2.0, 95% CI 0.7-5.6), were relatively thin (relative risk = 1.5, 0.8-3.0), or who had a first degree relative with breast cancer (relative risk = 2.0, 0.6-7.0). When joint effects of longer term use of both agents were considered, subjects who reported use of oral contraceptives for 10 or more years and hormone replacement for 3 or more years had a relative risk of 3.2 (95% CI 1.4-7.4) compared with nonusers of either preparation. CONCLUSIONS: Although our results must be cautiously interpreted given small numbers within subgroups, they raise concern and emphasize the need for further evaluation on breast cancer risk of the increasingly common exposure to both oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy.

The Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks: Surveillance Data Published Between April 1, 2016 and January 31, 2017 - United States, herein referred to as the Summary (Noninfectious), contains official statistics for nationally notifiable noninfectious conditions and disease outbreaks. This Summary (Noninfectious) is being published in the same volume of MMWR as the annual Summary of Notifiable Infectious Diseases and Conditions. Data on notifiable noninfectious conditions and disease outbreaks from prior years have been published previously.

With this 2016 Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks - United States, CDC is publishing official statistics for the occurrence of nationally notifiable noninfectious conditions and disease outbreaks for the second time in the same volume of MMWR as the annual Summary of Notifiable Infectious Diseases and Conditions. As was the case for the 2015 Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks, this joint publication is the result of a request by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) to provide readers with information on all nationally notifiable conditions and disease outbreaks in a single publication.

OBJECTIVE: We examined the representativeness of the nonfederal hospital emergency department (ED) visit data in the National Syndromic Surveillance Program (NSSP). METHODS: We used the 2012 American Hospital Association Annual Survey Database, other databases, and information from state and local health departments participating in the NSSP about which hospitals submitted data to the NSSP in October 2014. We compared ED visits for hospitals submitting data with all ED visits in all 50 states and Washington, DC. RESULTS: Approximately 60.4 million of 134.6 million ED visits nationwide (~45%) were reported to have been submitted to the NSSP. ED visits in 5 of 10 regions and the majority of the states were substantially underrepresented in the NSSP. The NSSP ED visits were similar to national ED visits in terms of many of the characteristics of hospitals and their service areas. However, visits in hospitals with the fewest annual ED visits, in rural trauma centers, and in hospitals serving populations with high percentages of Hispanics and Asians were underrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: NSSP nonfederal hospital ED visit data were representative for many hospital characteristics and in some geographic areas but were not very representative nationally and in many locations. Representativeness could be improved by increasing participation in more states and among specific types of hospitals.

With this 2015 Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks — United States, CDC is publishing official statistics for the occurrence of nationally notifiable noninfectious conditions and disease outbreaks for the first time in the same volume of MMWR as the annual Summary of Notifiable Infectious Diseases (1). | This two-part publication provides the opportunity for readers to review information on all of the nationally notifiable conditions identified by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) in collaboration with CDC. This combined publication is the result of a February 2013 request by CSTE for CDC to present surveillance data on all nationally notifiable conditions and disease outbreaks in the same publication. In recent years, CSTE formalized and expanded the list of nationally notifiable conditions to include foodborne and waterborne disease outbreaks and four noninfectious conditions: acute pesticide-related illness and injury, cancer, silicosis, and elevated blood lead levels.* After discussion within the organization and with subject matter experts at CDC, CSTE concluded that inclusion of information on all nationally notifiable conditions in the same MMWR annual surveillance summary of nationally notifiable conditions would be useful and important for the public and public health professionals. | This Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks includes six chapters treating the following subjects: acute pesticide-related illness and injury arising from occupational exposure (2), cancer (3), elevated blood lead levels among employed adults (4), elevated blood lead levels among children (5), silicosis (6), and foodborne and waterborne disease outbreaks (7). Information about nonoccupational acute pesticide-related illness could not be included this year because the data were not ready for publication. However, the CDC programs involved in pesticide-related illness surveillance activities plan to include these data in the 2016 MMWR publication of the annual Summary of Notifiable Noninfectious Conditions and Disease Outbreaks. | Information on elevated lead exposure is provided in two separate chapters because the sources of lead exposure differ between children and adults. Lead exposure among children is caused principally by deteriorated lead paint found in homes whereas lead exposure among adults occurs principally in the workplace. CDC's National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH) has primary responsibility for preventing disease from environmental (principally nonoccupational) hazards, and CDC's National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is responsible for preventing disease from workplace hazards. Because of the separate delegation of responsibilities and differences in sources of lead exposure, CDC has a linked surveillance system for lead exposure with NCEH responsible for the Childhood Blood Lead Surveillance (CBLS) system (5) and with NIOSH responsible for the Adult Blood Lead Epidemiology and Surveillance system (ABLES) (4). | Each of the six chapters in this Summary (Noninfectious) presents the most recent statistics available to the CDC program. Local, state, and territorial public health departments and other agencies within those jurisdictions (e.g., departments of labor, environmental protection agencies, cancer registries, and their agents) submit data on these conditions and outbreaks to CDC programs at the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, NCEH, and NIOSH. Previously, the programs compiled and published surveillance data on these noninfectious conditions and disease outbreaks periodically in multiple venues with variable timeframes and formats. | The Center for Surveillance, Epidemiology, and Laboratory Services (CSELS) coordinated the development and publication of this summary. Comments and suggestions from readers on this new combined publication are encouraged, including ones about whether the information presented could be made more useful. Comments should be sent to NNDSSweb@cdc.gov.

This supplement is the second of a series of periodic reports from a CDC initiative to monitor and report on the use of a set of selected clinical preventive services in the U.S. population in the context of recent national initiatives to improve access to and use of such services. Increasing the use of these services can result in substantial reductions in the burden of illness, death, and disability and lower treatment costs. This supplement focuses on services to improve the health of U.S. infants, children, and adolescents. The majority of clinical preventive services for infants, children, and adolescents are provided by the health-care sector. Public health agencies play important roles in increasing the use of these services by identifying and implementing policies that are effective in increasing use of the services and by collaborating with stakeholders to conduct programs to improve use. Recent health-reform initiatives, including efforts to increase the accessibility and affordability of preventive services, fund community prevention programs, and improve the use of health information technologies, offer opportunities to improve use of preventive services. This supplement, which follows a previous report on adult services, provides baseline information on the use of a set of selected clinical preventive services to improve the health of infants, children, and adolescents before implementation of these recent initiatives and discusses opportunities to increase the use of such services. This information can help public health practitioners, in collaboration with other stakeholders that have key roles in improving infant, child, and adolescent health (e.g., parents or guardians and their employers, health plans, health professionals, schools, child care facilities, community groups, and voluntary associations), understand the potential benefits of the recommended services, address the problem of underuse, and identify opportunities to apply effective strategies to improve use and foster accountability among stakeholders.

The findings described in this supplement can help improve collaboration among public health and other stakeholders who influence infant, child, and adolescent health (e.g., parents or guardians and their employers, health plans, health professionals, schools, child care facilities, community groups, and voluntary associations) to increase the use of selected clinical preventive services among U.S. infants, children, and adolescents. Increased use can substantially reduce illness and long-term disability and improve health and quality of life. This supplement underscores that the use of the clinical preventive services among U.S. infants, children, and adolescents is not optimal and is variable, ranging from <10% to approximately 85%, depending on the particular service. Use was particularly low for developmental screening and receipt of dental preventive services in young children, and for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination and tobacco cessation assistance, including counseling, in adolescents; however, opportunities exist to improve use of all of these services. Children and adolescents with no insurance and those with no usual source of health care (if available for analysis) were the groups least likely to have used the services. Use among the uninsured ranged from 1-39 percentage points below the general population averages, suggesting that improvements in insurance coverage that will result from the implementation of health-care reform are likely to increase use of these clinical preventive services. In 2012, a total of 4.9 million children (6.6% of children) were uninsured at the time of interview, and approximately 15% of eligible children in the United States are not enrolled in Medicaid and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) programs. In addition, although opportunities exist for greater insurance coverage and for use of recommended clinical preventive services under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-148), as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-152, together referred to as the Affordable Care Act [ACA]), a survey among the uninsured found a low level of awareness of the Health Insurance Marketplace (or Health Insurance Exchange) that can be used by families to acquire insurance or Medicaid coverage. The survey highlights the importance of focused efforts by governmental health agencies and other stakeholders to enroll uninsured children and adolescents in health plans. Also, although use of clinical preventive services in insured populations was greater than among the uninsured, use among the insured was generally <85%, and often much less. Therefore, having health insurance coverage alone might not be sufficient to optimize use of clinical preventive services, and additional measures to improve use probably will be necessary.

BACKGROUND: Expansion of health insurance coverage, and hence clinical preventive services (CPS), provides an opportunity for improvements in the health of adults. The degree to which expansion of health insurance coverage affects the use of CPS is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether Massachusetts health reform was associated with changes in healthcare access and use of CPS. DESIGN: We used a difference-in-differences framework to examine change in healthcare access and use of CPS among working-aged adults pre-reform (2002-2005) and post-reform (2007-2010) in Massachusetts compared with change in other New England states (ONES). SETTING: Population-based, cross-sectional Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 208,831 survey participants aged 18 to 64 years. INTERVENTION: Massachusetts health reform enacted in 2006. MEASUREMENTS: Four healthcare access measures outcomes and five CPS. KEY RESULTS: The proportions of adults who had health insurance coverage, a healthcare provider, no cost barrier to healthcare, an annual routine checkup, and a colorectal cancer screening increased significantly more in Massachusetts than those in the ONES. In Massachusetts, the prevalence of cervical cancer screening in pre-reform and post-reform periods was about the same; however, the ONES had a decrease of -1.6 percentage points (95 % confidence interval [CI] -2.5, -0.7; p <0.001). As a result, the prevalence of cervical cancer screening in Massachusetts was increased relative to the ONES (1.7, 95 % CI 0.2, 3.2; p = 0.02). Cholesterol screening, influenza immunization, and breast cancer screening did not improve more in Massachusetts than in the ONES. LIMITATIONS: Data are self-reported. CONCLUSIONS: Health reform may increase healthcare access and improve use of CPS. However, the effects of health reform on CPS use may vary by type of service and by state.

Few population-based studies have addressed the role that family history of colorectal cancer (CRC) plays in clinician decision making or patient health choices. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of family history of CRC on clinician practice, patient CRC screening, and patient preventive behavior. We analyzed 2008 Oregon Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System data to examine associations between family history of CRC and 1) patient-reported clinician recommendations, 2) perceived risk of developing CRC, 3) adoption of preventive and screening behaviors, and 4) CRC risk factors among 1,795 respondents without CRC. A family history of CRC was positively associated with a higher likelihood of respondents reporting that their clinicians discussed colorectal cancer screening (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4-7.4) and of respondents having colorectal screening within the recommended time period (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.3-3.9). A family history of CRC was also associated with respondents reporting lifestyle changes to prevent CRC (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.7-4.0). A family history of CRC may prompt clinicians to recommend screening and preventive behavior changes and motivate patients to adopt such strategies.

The findings described in this supplement can help improve collaboration among public health and other stakeholders who influence population health, including employers, health plans, health professionals, and voluntary associations, to increase the use of a set of clinical preventive services that, with improved use, can substantially reduce morbidity and mortality in the U.S. adult population. This supplement highlighted that the use of the clinical preventive services in the U.S. adult population is not optimal and is quite variable, ranging from approximately 10% to 85%, depending on the particular service. Use was particularly low for tobacco cessation, aspirin use to reduce risk of cardiovascular disease, and influenza vaccination; however, ample opportunity exists to improve use of all of these services. Among the specific populations least likely to have used the recommended services, persons with no insurance, no usual source of care, or no recent use of the health-care system (if included in the analysis) were the groups least likely to have used the services. Use among the uninsured was generally 10 to 30 percentage points below the general population averages, suggesting that improvements in insurance coverage are likely to increase use of these clinical preventive services. A randomized, controlled trial of an expansion of Medicaid coverage by Oregon in 2008 supports this hypothesis by demonstrating improved use of clinical services with increased health insurance coverage. A recent survey among the uninsured found a low level of awareness of the provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 as amended by the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (referred to collectively as the Affordable Care Act [ACA]). Therefore, improving opportunities for coverage might be insufficient, and focused efforts by governmental health agencies and other stakeholders are likely to be needed to enroll uninsured persons in health plans. In addition, although use of the preventive services in insured populations was greater than among the uninsured, use among the insured was generally <75%, and often much less. Therefore, having health insurance coverage might not itself be sufficient to optimize use of clinical preventive services, and additional measures to improve use are likely to be necessary.

This supplement introduces a CDC initiative to monitor and report periodically on the use of a set of selected clinical preventive services in the U.S. adult population in the context of recent national initiatives to improve access to and use of such services. Increasing the use of these services has the potential to lead to substantial reductions in the burden of illness, death, and disability and to lower treatment costs. The majority of clinical preventive services are provided by the health-care sector, and public health agencies play important roles in helping to support increases in the use of these services (e.g., by identifying and implementing policies that are effective in increasing use of the services and by collaborating with stakeholders to conduct programs to improve use). Recent health reform initiatives, including efforts to increase the accessibility and affordability of preventive services, fund community prevention programs, and improve the use of health information technologies, offer opportunities to enhance use of preventive services. This supplement provides baseline information on a set of selected clinical preventive services before implementation of these recent reforms and discusses opportunities to increase the use of such services. This information can help public health practitioners collaborate with other stakeholders that have key roles to play in improving public health (e.g., employers, health plans, health professionals, and voluntary associations), understand the potential benefits of the recommended services, address the problem of underuse, and identify opportunities to apply effective strategies to improve use and foster accountability among stakeholders.

Advances in genomics and related fields promise a new era of personalized medicine in the cancer care continuum. Nevertheless, there are fundamental challenges in integrating genomic medicine into cancer practice. We explore how multilevel research can contribute to implementation of genomic medicine. We first review the rapidly developing scientific discoveries in this field and the paucity of current applications that are ready for implementation in clinical and public health programs. We then define a multidisciplinary translational research agenda for successful integration of genomic medicine into policy and practice and consider challenges for successful implementation. We illustrate the agenda using the example of Lynch syndrome testing in newly diagnosed cases of colorectal cancer and cascade testing in relatives. We synthesize existing information in a framework for future multilevel research for integrating genomic medicine into the cancer care continuum.

Genomic copy number alterations (CNA) are common in breast cancer. Identifying characteristic CNAs associated with specific breast cancer subtypes is a critical step in defining potential mechanisms of disease initiation and progression. We used genome-wide array comparative genomic hybridization to identify distinctive CNAs in breast cancer subtypes from 259 young (diagnosed with breast cancer at <55 years) African American (AA) and Caucasian American (CA) women originally enrolled in a larger population-based study. We compared the average frequency of CNAs across the whole genome for each breast tumor subtype and found that estrogen receptor (ER)-negative tumors had a higher average frequency of genome-wide gain (P < 0.0001) and loss (P = 0.02) compared to ER-positive tumors. Triple-negative (TN) tumors had a higher average frequency of genome-wide gain (P < 0.0001) and loss (P = 0.003) than non-TN tumors. No significant difference in CNA frequency was observed between HER2-positive and -negative tumors. We also identified previously unreported recurrent CNAs (frequency >40%) for TN breast tumors at 10q, 11p, 11q, 16q, 20p, and 20q. In addition, we report CNAs that differ in frequency between TN breast tumors of AA and CA women. This is of particular relevance because TN breast cancer is associated with higher mortality and young AA women have higher rates of TN breast tumors compared to CA women. These data support the possibility that higher overall frequency of genomic alteration events as well as specific focal CNAs in TN breast tumors might contribute in part to the poor breast cancer prognosis for young AA women.

In spite of accelerating human genome discoveries in a wide variety of diseases of public health significance, the promise of personalized health care and disease prevention based on genomics has lagged behind. In a time of limited resources, public health agencies must continue to focus on implementing programs that can improve health and prevent disease now. Nevertheless, public health has an important and assertive leadership role in addressing the promise and pitfalls of human genomics for population health. Such efforts are needed not only to implement what is known in genomics to improve health but also to reduce potential harm and create the infrastructure needed to derive health benefits in the future.

BACKGROUND: Testing for mutations in the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 (BRCA) has been commercially available since 1996. PURPOSE: This study sought to determine, among U.S. primary care physicians, the level of awareness and utilization of BRCA testing and the 2005 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations. METHODS: In 2009, data were analyzed on 1500 physician respondents to the 2007 DocStyles national survey (515 family practitioners, 485 internists, 250 pediatricians, and 250 obstetricians/gynecologists). RESULTS: Overall, 87% of physicians were aware of BRCA testing, and 25% reported having ordered testing for at least one patient in the past year. Ordering tests was most prevalent among obstetricians/gynecologists in practice for more than 10 years, with more affluent patients. Physicians were asked to select indications for BRCA testing from seven different clinical scenarios representing increased (4) or low-risk (3) situations consistent with the USPSTF guidelines. Among ordering physicians (pediatricians excluded), 45% chose at least one low-risk scenario as an indication for BRCA testing. Only 19% correctly selected all of the increased-risk and none of the low-risk scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial majority of primary care physicians are aware of BRCA testing and many report having ordered at least one test within the past year. A minority, however, appear to consistently recognize the family history patterns identified by the USPSTF as appropriate indications for BRCA evaluation. These results suggest the need to improve providers' knowledge about existing recommendations-particularly in this era of increased BRCA direct-to-consumer marketing.

Numerous genomic tests continue to emerge as potential tools in the diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and prevention for a wide variety of common human diseases. To date, most of these tests have "insufficient evidence" of clinical validity and utility for their use in clinical practice. Explicit and quantitative tools can be used in the evaluation of direct and indirect evidence on the utility of genomic tests. As suggested in an article in this month's issue by Veenstra et al., a recommendation matrix can be developed based on the amount of certainty of the evidence and the assessment of the risk-benefit profile. To supplement the current binary (up or down) evidence-based recommendation for use, it is worthwhile to explore all available data to develop a three-tier evidence-based recommendation classification of genomic tests ("use in practice," "promote informed decision-making," and "discourage use"). Promoting informed decision making may be a valuable recommendation for tests for which there is sufficient information on analytic and clinical validity and for which the risk/benefit analysis on clinical utility is promising but not definitive. This approach could provide interim guidance for clinical practice, while rigorous outcomes research is conducted to assess the impact of such tests on patients, families, and population health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Large body size has been associated with decreased risk of breast cancer in premenopausal women but with increased risk in postmenopausal women. Limited information is available about African-American women and differences by estrogen and progesterone receptor status. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Women's Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study among 3,997 white and African-American breast cancer case patients diagnosed in 1994 to 1998 and 4,041 control participants ages 35 to 64 years. We calculated multivariate odds ratios (OR) as measures of relative risk of breast cancer associated with self-reported body mass index (BMI) at age 18 and 5 years before diagnosis (recent BMI). RESULTS: Risk tended to decrease with increasing BMI at age 18 years in all women [OR(BMI ≥ 25 kg/m(2) versus < 20 kg/m(2)) = 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.63-0.90; P(trend) = 0.005] and with recent BMI in premenopausal women (OR(BMI ≥ 35 kg/m(2) versus < 25 kg/m(2)) = 0.81; 95% CI, 0.61-1.06; P(trend) = 0.05), unmodified by race. Among postmenopausal white but not African-American women, there was an inverse relation between recent BMI and risk. High recent BMI was associated with increased risk of estrogen receptor- and progesterone receptor-positive tumors among postmenopausal African-American women (OR(BMI ≥ 35 kg/m(2) versus < 25 kg/m(2)) = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.08-3.09; P(trend) = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Among women at age 35 to 64 years, BMI at age 18 years is inversely associated with risk of breast cancer, but association with recent BMI varies by menopause status, race, and hormone receptor status. Impact: Our findings indicate that studies of BMI and breast cancer should consider breast cancer subtypes. (c)2010 AACR.

The National Institutes of Health convened a State-ofthe-Science Conference to examine the evidence for the | role of family history when assessing and managing risk | for common chronic diseases in primary health care [1] . | A panel of health professionals was assembled for this | conference. They evaluated the strength of the science for | the following questions: | (1) What are the key elements of a family history in a | primary care setting for the purposes of risk assessment | for common diseases? | (2) What is the accuracy of the family history, and under what conditions does the accuracy vary? | (3) What is the direct evidence that getting a family | history will improve health outcomes for the patient or | family? | (4) What is the direct evidence that getting a family | history will result in adverse outcomes for the patient or | family? | (5) What are the factors that encourage or discourage | obtaining and using a family history? | (6) What are future research directions for assessing | the value of family history for common diseases in the | primary care setting?

OBJECTIVE: To examine the extent to which the only national organized screening program in the US, the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP), has helped to meet the cervical cancer screening needs of underserved women. METHODS: Low-income, uninsured women 18-64 years of age are eligible for free cervical cancer screening services through NBCCEDP. We used data from the US Census Bureau to estimate the number of eligible women, based on insurance status and income. The estimates were adjusted for hysterectomy status using the National Health Interview Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We used administrative data from NBCCEDP to obtain the number of women receiving NBCCEDP-funded Papanicolaou (Pap) tests. We then calculated the percentage of NBCCEDP-eligible women who received free cervical cancer screening through NBCCEDP. We also used the NHIS to calculate the percentage of NBCCEDP-eligible women screened nationally and the percentage unscreened. RESULTS: In 2004-2006, nearly 9% (775,312 of 8.9 million) of NBCCEDP-eligible women, received NBCCEDP-funded Pap test. Rates varied substantially by age groups, race, and ethnicity. NBCCEDP-eligible women 40-64 years of age had a higher screening rate (22.6%) than eligible women 18-39 years of age (2.3%). Non-Hispanic women had a higher screening rate (9.3%) than Hispanic women (7.3%). Among non-Hispanics, the screening rate was highest among American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) women (36.1%) and lowest among women of different race combinations (4.6%), The percentage of eligible women screened in each state ranged from 2.0 to 38.4%. CONCLUSIONS: Although NBCCEDP provided cervical cancer screening services to 775,312 low-income, uninsured women, this number represented a small percentage of those eligible. In 2005, more than 34% of NBCCEDP-eligible women (3.1 million women) did not receive recommended Pap tests from either NBCCEDP or other sources.

Steroid 5-alpha-reductase type 2 (SRD5a2) is a critical enzyme in androgen metabolism. Two polymorphisms in the SRD5a2 gene, V89L (rs523349) and A49T (rs9282858), have been studied for associations with prostate cancer risk, with conflicting results. The authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis (1997-2007) to examine these associations and compared the results with findings from genome-wide association studies of prostate cancer. The meta-analysis included 24 case-control studies (10,088 cases and 10,120 controls for V89L and 4,998 cases and 5,451 controls for A49T). The authors found that prostate cancer was not associated with V89L (L allele vs. V allele: odds ratio = 0.99, 95% confidence interval: 0.94, 1.05) and was probably not associated with A49T (T allele vs. A allele: odds ratio = 1.10, 95% confidence interval: 0.86, 1.40). These results could have been distorted by spectrum-of-disease bias, convenience sampling of cases and controls, genotype misclassification, and/or confounding. Neither V89L nor A49T was included in microarray chips used for published genome-wide association studies. Analysis of well-designed population-based studies with pathway-based arrays containing common genetic variants could be useful for identifying genetic factors in prostate cancer.

Most major medical organizations recommend routine screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. Screening can lead to early detection of these cancers, resulting in reduced mortality. Yet, not all people who should be screened are screened regularly or, in some cases, ever. This report presents results of systematic reviews of effectiveness, applicability, economic efficiency, barriers to implementation, and other harms or benefits of provider reminder/recall interventions to increase screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers. These interventions involve using systems to inform healthcare providers when individual clients are due (reminder) or overdue (recall) for specific cancer screening tests. Evidence in this review of studies published from 1986 through 2004 indicates that reminder/recall systems can effectively increase screening with mammography, Pap, fecal occult blood tests, and flexible sigmoidoscopy. Additional research is needed to determine if provider reminder/recall systems are effective in increasing colorectal cancer screening by colonoscopy. Specific areas for further research are also suggested. copyright 2010.

OBJECTIVE: Predictors of intrinsic breast cancer subtypes, including the triple-negative (TN) subtype, are largely unknown. We evaluated whether anthropometrics, demographics, and reproductive history were associated with distinct breast cancer subtypes. METHODS: Invasive breast tumors from a population-based case-control study of 476 (116 black and 360 white) Atlanta women aged 20-54, diagnosed between 1990 and 1992, were centrally reviewed and immunohistochemically analyzed for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2); then grouped [TN (ER-PR-HER2-); ER-PR-HER2+; ER/PR+HER2+; ER/PR+HER2- (case-only reference group)]. Data were from interviews and anthropometric measurements; adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using logistic regression, including both case-only and case-control comparisons. RESULTS: From the case-only analyses and compared with the ER/PR+HER2- subtype, women with TN tumors were more likely to be obese than normal/underweight [OR = 1.89 (95% CI = 1.22, 2.92)]. Regardless of HER2 status, ER-PR- tumors were associated with black race, young age at first birth, having a recent birth, and being overweight. CONCLUSIONS: Distinct breast cancer subtypes have unique sociodemographic, anthropometric and reproductive characteristics and possibly different pathways for development.

The increasing availability of personal genomic tests has led to discussions about the validity and utility of such tests and the balance of benefits and harms. A multidisciplinary workshop was convened by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the scientific foundation for using personal genomics in risk assessment and disease prevention and to develop recommendations for targeted research. The clinical validity and utility of personal genomics is a moving target with rapidly developing discoveries but little translation research to close the gap between discoveries and health impact. Workshop participants made recommendations in five domains: (1) developing and applying scientific standards for assessing personal genomic tests; (2) developing and applying a multidisciplinary research agenda, including observational studies and clinical trials to fill knowledge gaps in clinical validity and utility; (3) enhancing credible knowledge synthesis and information dissemination to clinicians and consumers; (4) linking scientific findings to evidence-based recommendations for use of personal genomics; and (5) assessing how the concept of personal utility can affect health benefits, costs, and risks by developing appropriate metrics for evaluation. To fulfill the promise of personal genomics, a rigorous multidisciplinary research agenda is needed.