Personalized estimates of breast cancer risk in clinical practice and public health

This paper defines absolute risk and some of its properties, and presents applications in breast cancer counseling and prevention. For counseling, estimates of absolute risk give useful perspective and can be used in management decisions that require weighing risks and benefits, such as whether or not to take tamoxifen to prevent breast cancer. Absolute risk models are also useful in designing intervention trials to prevent breast cancer and in assessing the potential reductions in absolute risk of disease that might result from reducing exposures that are associated with breast cancer. In these applications, it is important that the risk model be well calibrated, namely that it accurately predicts the numbers of women who will develop breast cancer in various subsets of the population. Absolute risk models are also needed to implement a 'high risk' prevention strategy that identifies a high-risk subset of the population and focuses intervention efforts on that subset. The limitations of the high-risk strategy are discussed, including the need for risk models with high discriminatory accuracy, and the need for less toxic interventions that can reduce the threshold of risk above which the intervention provides a net benefit. I also discuss the potential use of risk models in allocating prevention resources under cost constraints. High discriminatory accuracy of the risk model, in addition to good calibration, is desirable in this application, and the risk assessment should not be expensive in comparison with the intervention.     

Validation of a decision model for preventive pharmacological strategies in postmenopausal women

Background: Benefits and risks of a combined hormone replacement therapy (HRT) based on randomized clinical trial emerged on various disease endpoints in 2002. The Womens Health Initiative (WHI) provides an important health answer for healthy postmenopausal women, such as do not use combined HRT to prevent chronic disease, because of the elevated risk of coronary artery disease (CHD), stroke and venous thromboembolism. In March 2004, the NIH stopped the drugs in the estrogen-alone trial after finding an increase risk of stroke and no effect, neither an increase or a decrease, on risk of CHD after an average of 7 years in the trial. On the other hand, raloxifene, which does not seem to significantly increase the risk of cardiovascular events and could retain skeletal benefits without stimulating endometrial and breast tissue, requires decision-makers since no current data on these disease clinical endpoints have been published. Objective: To construct a multi-disease model based on patient-specific risk factor profiles, and to validate the multi-disease model with several tools of internal and external validities. Methods: A Markov state model was developed. The risks of these various diseases (including coronary artery disease, stroke, hip fracture and breast cancer) are derived from published hazards proportional models which take into account significant risk factors. Canadian-specific rates and data sources for these transition probabilities are derived from published studies and Canadian Health Statistics. The validation of our model were based on several tools of internal and external validities, such as Canadian life expectancy, population-based incidence rate of diseases, clinical trials and other published life expectancy models. Results: First, presumably, small changes in the lifetime probability of dying support the hypothesis that the disease states operate in a largely independent fashion. For instance, the difference in the probability of dying from a particular disease by the complete elimination of a selected disease, such as CHD, stroke or breast cancer, ranged from 0.2 to 2.2% of difference in the lifetime probability of dying of these diseases. Second, we demonstrated that the model adequately predicted the Canadian population life-table and disease-incidence rates from population-based data among women from 45 to 75 years old. The predictions of the model were cross-checked from non-source data, such as predicted outcomes versus observed outcomes from results of clinical trials. Predicted relative risks of CHD event, breast cancer and hip fracture fell in the reported 95% confidence interval of clinical trials. Finally, predicted treatment benefits are comparable with those of published life expectancy models. Conclusions: The results of the study demonstrated that this multi-disease model, including coronary artery disease, stroke, hip fracture and breast cancer, is a valid model to predict the impact on life expectancy or number of events prevented for preventive pharmacological interventions.     

The Impact of Risk on Preference Values: Implications for Evaluations of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis Therapy

Objective: The objective was to assess the impact of different levels of risk of disease on a woman's preferences for health states. Women were provided with health scenarios incorporating different levels of lifetime risks for breast cancer, hip fracture, and coronary heart disease (CHD). In this way, we were able to determine the incremental effect of changes in risks of each disease on preference values.
Methods and Data: Preference values and utility scores were obtained for six health scenarios by both the feeling thermometer (FT) and standard gamble (SG) methods. Scenarios presented the different lifetime risks of CHD, breast cancer, and hip fracture associated with and not associated with long-term use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and raloxifene. Risks of breast cancer were based on perceived risks and population risks. The sample population consisted of 40 healthy female volunteers aged between 45 and 65 years randomly selected from the Ottawa-Carleton district.
Results: Based on their perceived risk of breast cancer, the women had higher value scores for the raloxifene risk profile than for both HRT ( p = .002) and no therapy ( p = .003), with similar results for analyses based on population risks and from utility scores. Regression analysis showed that the risk of breast cancer ( p <.001) was the only disease risk that was statistically significantly associated with women's preferences.
Conclusions: Women had significant preferences over the different risk profiles, primarily due to the incremental effect on changes in values for the risk of breast cancer. Therefore, studies evaluating therapies for osteoporosis should consider patient preferences for living with different risk profiles.     

Tamoxifen's clinical applications: old and new

The American Cancer Society estimates that this year more than 180, 000 women in the United States will develop breast cancer and more than 40,000 women will die of the disease. According to a National Cancer Institute model, 5 years of preventive therapy with tamoxifen citrate reduced the risk of invasive breast cancer by 49% (P<.00001) in women at increased risk for breast cancer. The reduction in risk was greater in women with a history of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS; 56% relative risk reduction) or atypical hyperplasia (86% relative risk reduction). It should be noted, however, that no benefit was found in 2 European studies using notably different risk evaluation models and entry criteria. Because elevated risks of uterine cancer and thromboembolic disease have been associated with tamoxifen therapy, appropriate counseling should be given to any woman considering tamoxifen as a means of reducing breast cancer risk. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:906-912     

Benefits of tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention do not always outweigh overall risks

In women at high risk of breast cancer, tamoxifen is effective in reducing the incidence of the disease. The intervention, however, is associated with significant risk. During the 5-year period of this study, although the number of breast cancers was reduced, the number of serious adverse effects and deaths were higher in the treated group. Women at a lower risk of breast cancer than those studied would be even less likely to benefit from tamoxifen while risking the same serious adverse outcomes. For the small proportion of women with a high risk of breast cancer and a low risk of adverse events, discussion of this intervention may be warranted.     

The benefits and costs of tamoxifen for breast cancer prevention

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effects of key uncertainties on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of breast cancer prevention with tamoxifen. METHODS: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of tamoxifen therapy relative to placebo was estimated using decision analysis with Markov modelling of health states, outcomes and costs for a simulated cohort of women at high risk for breast cancer. Relative effects of tamoxifen's benefits and harms were estimated from meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials. Cost estimates were based on Australian treatment patterns and costs. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained with costs and effects discounted at a 5% annual rate. RESULTS: Tamoxifen therapy over five years reduces the incidence of breast cancer by approximately 1.4%, which is offset by an increase in endometrial cancer of 0.7% and pulmonary embolism of 0.2%. If the reduction is permanent (preventing new breast cancers emerging over five years and no further treatment effect thereafter), the model estimates an increase in life expectancy of 0.057 QALYs and an extra cost of $2,193; or $38,271/QALY gained. A model assuming further treatment effects of tamoxifen preventing new breast cancers emerging for up to 10 years results in an incremental cost of $19,354/QALY. However, if five years of tamoxifen therapy merely delays when these breast cancers appear (such that by 10 years there is no longer a reduced incidence), the incremental cost per QALY saved is estimated to be $199,149. CONCLUSIONS: Tamoxifen is potentially cost-effective in preventing breast cancer in women at high risk. However, its cost-effectiveness as a preventive therapy is highly sensitive to whether these cancers are permanently prevented or their clinical presentation is only delayed. Long-term follow-up in randomised controlled trials is therefore crucial in forming health policy.     

Patients' Expectations of Screening and Preventive Treatments

PURPOSE

An informed decision to accept a health care intervention requires an understanding of its likely benefit. This study assessed participants'' estimates of the benefit, as well as minimum acceptable benefit, of screening for breast and bowel cancer and medication to prevent hip fracture and cardiovascular disease.

METHODS

Three general practitioners sent questionnaires to all registered patients aged 50 to 70 years. Patients agreeing to participate in the study were asked to estimate the number of events (fractures or deaths) prevented in a group of 5,000 patients undergoing each intervention over a period of 10 years, and to indicate the minimum number of events avoided by the intervention that they considered justified its use. The proportions of participants that overestimated each intervention''s benefit were calculated, and univariate and multivariable analyses of predictors of response were performed.

RESULTS

The participation rate was 36%: 977 patients were invited to participate in the study, and 354 returned a completed questionnaire. Participants overestimated the degree of benefit conferred by all interventions: 90% of participants overestimated the effect of breast cancer screening, 94% overestimated the effect of bowel cancer screening, 82% overestimated the effect of hip fracture preventive medication, and 69% overestimated the effect of preventive medication for cardiovascular disease. Estimates of minimum acceptable benefit were more conservative, but other than for cardiovascular disease mortality prevention, most respondents indicated a minimum benefit greater than these interventions achieve. A lower level of education was associated with higher estimates of minimum acceptable benefit for all interventions.

CONCLUSION

Patients overestimated the risk reduction achieved with 4 examples of screening and preventive medications. A lower level of education was associated with higher minimum benefit to justify intervention use. This tendency to overestimate benefits may affect patients'' decisions to use such interventions, and practitioners should be aware of this tendency when discussing these interventions with patients.Key words: cancer screening, coronary artery disease, osteoporosis, health promotion, atherosclerosis/prevention & control, bone loss/prevention & control     

Economic Evaluation of Using a Genetic Test to Direct Breast Cancer Chemoprevention in White Women with a Previous Breast Biopsy

Background

Tamoxifen therapy reduces the risk of breast cancer but increases the risk of serious adverse events including endometrial cancer and thromboembolic events.

Objectives

The cost effectiveness of using a commercially available breast cancer risk assessment test (BREVAGen?) to inform the decision of which women should undergo chemoprevention by tamoxifen was modeled in a simulated population of women who had undergone biopsies but had no diagnosis of cancer.

Methods

A continuous time, discrete event, mathematical model was used to simulate a population of white women aged 40–69 years, who were at elevated risk for breast cancer because of a history of benign breast biopsy. Women were assessed for clinical risk of breast cancer using the Gail model and for genetic risk using a panel of seven common single nucleotide polymorphisms. We evaluated the cost effectiveness of using genetic risk together with clinical risk, instead of clinical risk alone, to determine eligibility for 5 years of tamoxifen therapy. In addition to breast cancer, the simulation included health states of endometrial cancer, pulmonary embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, stroke, and cataract. Estimates of costs in 2012 US dollars were based on Medicare reimbursement rates reported in the literature and utilities for modeled health states were calculated as an average of utilities reported in the literature. A 50-year time horizon was used to observe lifetime effects including survival benefits.

Results

For those women at intermediate risk of developing breast cancer (1.2–1.66 % 5-year risk), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the combined genetic and clinical risk assessment strategy over the clinical risk assessment-only strategy was US$47,000, US$44,000, and US$65,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, for women aged 40–49, 50–59, and 60–69 years, respectively (assuming a price of US$945 for genetic testing). Results were sensitive to assumptions about patient adherence, utility of life while taking tamoxifen, and cost of genetic testing.

Conclusions

From the US payer’s perspective, the combined genetic and clinical risk assessment strategy may be a moderately cost-effective alternative to using clinical risk alone to guide chemoprevention recommendations for women at intermediate risk of developing breast cancer.     

Effect of preventive messages tailored to family history on health behaviors: the Family Healthware Impact Trial

PURPOSE We wanted to determine the impact of automated family history assessment and tailored messages for coronary heart disease, stroke, diabetes, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancer on preventive behaviors compared with a standard preventive message.METHODS The study was a cluster-randomized clinical trial that included 41 primary care practices, the majority in the Midwest, using Family Healthware, a self-administered, Web-based tool that assesses familial risk for the diseases and provides personalized risk-tailored messages. Patients in the control group received an age- and sex-specific health message related to lifestyle and screening. Smoking cessation, fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity, aspirin use, blood pressure, and cholesterol and blood glucose screening were assessed at baseline and 6 months after the intervention.RESULTS Of 4,248 participants, 3,344 (78%) completed the study. Participants were white (91%), female (70%), and insured (97%), and had a mean age of 50.6 years (range 35–65 years). Intervention participants were more likely to increase daily fruit and vegetable consumption from 5 or fewer servings a day to 5 or more servings a day (OR = 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–1.58) and to increase physical activity (OR = 1.47; 95% CI, 1.08–1.98) to 5 to 6 times a week for 30 minutes or more a week. The absolute differences in proportion were 3% and 4%, respectively. Intervention participants were less likely to move from not having cholesterol screening in the last 5 years to having their cholesterol measured within 5 years (OR = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17–0.67), with an absolute difference of 15%.CONCLUSIONS Messages tailored to an individual’s familial risk for 6 common diseases modestly increased self-reported physical activity and fruit and vegetable intake but reduced the likelihood of receiving cholesterol screening.     

Breast cancer risk reduction: what do we know and where should we go?

Clinicians should be aware of the advances in breast cancer risk assessment and risk-reduction therapy. The modified Gail model is appropriate for predicting the risk of developing breast cancer within the next 5 years for most women between ages 35 and 75. Tamoxifen has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for reduction of breast cancer risk in women aged 35 and older who meet the threshold risk for breast cancer. Raloxifene is being compared with tamoxifen in the clinical trial, STAR (a Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene), which is now enrolling postmenopausal women aged 35 or older. The risks and benefits of therapy to reduce breast cancer risk are reviewed here. Processes for comparison of risks and benefits and for shared decision making are outlined.     

Breast cancer anxiety's associations with responses to a chemoprevention decision aid

Few studies have examined how specific emotions may affect decision-making processes. Anxiety may be especially relevant in health decisions such as those related to cancer in which thoughts of illness or death may be abundant. We examined associations between women's anxiety about developing breast cancer and variables related to their decision to take a medication that could reduce their chances of the disease. Six-hundred and thirty-two American women, who had an increased risk of breast cancer, reviewed a web-based decision aid about tamoxifen. We examined associations between their baseline, self-reported anxiety about developing the disease and post decision aid measures including knowledge about tamoxifen, attitude toward the medication, and behavioral intentions to look for more information and take the medication. Results showed that anxiety was not associated with knowledge about tamoxifen, but it was associated with attitude toward the medication such that women who were more anxious about developing breast cancer were more likely to think the benefits were worth the risks. Greater anxiety was also associated with greater behavioral intentions to look for additional information and take the medication in the next few months. Secondary analyses showed that behavioral intentions were related to knowledge of tamoxifen and attitude toward the medication only for women who were reporting low levels of anxiety. Overall, the findings suggest that anxiety about breast cancer may motivate interest in tamoxifen and not necessarily through affecting knowledge or attitudes.     

Cancers in Australia in 2010 attributable to and prevented by the use of combined oral contraceptives

Objectives: To estimate the proportion and number of cancers occurring in Australia in 2010 attributable to combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) use. Methods: We estimated the population attributable fraction (PAF) for cancers causally associated with combined OCP use (breast, cervix), and the proportion of endometrial and ovarian cancers prevented (prevented fraction [PF]). We used standard formulae incorporating prevalence of combined OCP use in the Australian population, relative risks of cancer associated with this exposure and cancer incidence. Results: An estimated 105 breast and 52 cervical cancers (0.7% and 6.4% of each cancer, respectively) in Australia in 2010 were attributable to current use of combined OCP. Past combined OCP use was estimated to have prevented 1,032 endometrial and 308 ovarian cancers in 2010, reducing the number of cancers that would otherwise have occurred by 31% and 19%, respectively. Conclusions: A small proportion of breast and cervical cancers is attributable to combined OCP use; OCP use is likely to have prevented larger numbers of endometrial and ovarian cancers. Implications: Women seeking contraceptive advice should be told of potential adverse effects, but should also be told that – along with reproductive health benefits – combined OCP use can reduce long‐term risks of ovarian and endometrial cancers.     

The epidemiology of mass breast cancer screening--a plea for a valid measure of benefit

The present paper analyses the epidemiologic effects of mass breast cancer screening. Mass mammography may possibly achieve a breast cancer mortality reduction in relative risk terms. However, this does not necessarily represent a net benefit. It is argued that the benefits and adverse effects of a screening programme must be measured in terms of absolute risks. According to this measure, the mortality reduction achieved by a mass breast screening programme is only one death per approx. 15,000 women-years. Many thousands of mammograms are needed to prevent one cancer death, and for each woman who can derive a direct benefit in terms of a prevented breast cancer death, hundreds of women have to suffer the anxiety of a positive screening mammography. Moreover, it is possible that adverse effects of breast cancer screening may contribute to mortality from other causes. Even with the assumption that screening can save lives, the net health effect of mass breast cancer screening is questionable and appears to be rather detrimental. It may be an error to recommend mass breast screening.     

Tamoxifen therapy in breast cancer control worldwide.

In most developed and many developing countries, breast cancer is the most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among women. At least 50% of all breast cancer patients worldwide would survive longer, however, if public awareness about and early detection of the condition were increased and greater use were made of efficient treatment of proven value. With early-stage, localized breast cancer, local treatment combined with adjuvant hormonal therapy with tamoxifen, a synthetic estrogen, could save the lives of 6 women out of 100 compared with local treatment alone. Tamoxifen has anti-estrogenic effects not only on breast cancer cells but also on liver metabolism and bone, with concomitant decreases in risk factors for chronic skeletal and vascular system diseases. Long-term tamoxifen treatment causes major adverse clinical effects in < 5% of women; menopausal and vasomotor symptoms occur in the majority of treated women, but their severity lessens over time. Tamoxifen is being considered as a standard therapy and is included in the WHO list of essential drugs for the treatment of breast cancer patients in both developing and developed countries. For the control of breast cancer more successfully worldwide, one challenge is to make tamoxifen therapy available to greater numbers of women.     

Antiestrogen chemoprevention of breast cancer: critical issues and research

Estrogenic hormones play critical roles in many aspects of women's health. Therefore, the impact of any hormonal manipulation must be carefully considered. While the evidence is good that chemoprevention, or more accurately chemosuppression, of breast cancer with tamoxifen is possible, further data are needed to support the case that hormone replacement with tamoxifen in healthy postmenopausal women would provide overall health benefits. Specifically, further data are needed regarding the biological effects of tamoxifen on risk factors for cardiovascular disease, on bone, on the liver, on the uterus, and on the coagulation system. Frequency, severity, and predictors for vasomotor, gynecologic, and depressant side effects also need to be well described. These data will allow rigorous cost-effectiveness analysis of hormone replacement therapies with tamoxifen and estrogen, as well as an analysis of the cost effectiveness of a clinical trial to prove definitively critical health benefits.     

A randomized trial of breast cancer risk counseling: the impact on self-reported mammography use.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the impact of individualized breast cancer risk counseling on mammography use among women at risk for breast cancer. METHODS: Participants (n = 508) were randomized to the breast cancer risk counseling intervention or a general health education control intervention, and 85% completed follow-up. RESULTS: In multivariate modeling, a significant group-by-education interaction demonstrated that among less-educated participants, breast cancer risk counseling led to reduced mammography use. There was no intervention effect among the more-educated participants. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that standard breast cancer risk counseling could have an adverse impact on the health behaviors of less-educated women.     

Racial differences in tamoxifen metabolism

PURPOSE: A recent study indicates that black women may have a higher risk/benefit ratio from tamoxifen than white women. Several reports in the literature indicate that racial differences in the risks/benefits from other pharmaceutical agents may be partially due to racial differences in drug metabolism. Thus, we explore the hypothesis that the racial difference in the tamoxifen risk/benefit ratio may be due, in part, to racial differences in tamoxifen metabolism.METHODS: We conducted a pilot study in which we recruited 6 white and 4 black breast cancer patients from the Baltimore, Maryland area. All patients were taking tamoxifen for at least 30 days. Each provided a blood sample that was used to measure tamoxifen metabolites by high performance liquid chromatography.RESULTS: Our results indicate that the black women had significantly higher levels of the tamoxifen metabolite, N-desmethyltamoxifen (N-DMT) than the white women (0.585 μg/ml vs 0.199 μg/ml, p < 0.05). There were no differences in the serum levels of tamoxifen in black and white women (0.809 vs 0.699, p > 0.1).CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that both black and white breast cancer patients reach steady state tamoxifen levels, but that black women are more likely to metabolize tamoxifen to N-DMT or to maintain higher levels of N-DMT (i.e., less excretion of N-DMT) than white women. N-DMT is thought to be less effective in breast cancer treatment than tamoxifen. N-DMT also has been associated with excess proliferation in breast cancer cells. Thus, it is possible that the relatively high tamoxifen risk/benefit in black women occurs because tamoxifen is readily converted to N-DMT in black women, but not in white women. Although the data reported here are from a pilot study, it is important to note that significant racial differences in tamoxifen metabolism were observed with only a few participants. We urge other investigators to confirm these findings using a large population of breast cancer patients.     

Management of Postmenopausal Osteoporosis

Postmenopausal osteoporosis is a very common disease, and approximately half of all women aged >50 years will experience an osteoporotic fracture during the remainder of their lifetime. The predominant cause of postmenopausal osteoporosis is the decline in estrogen levels, which causes an increase in bone turnover, and results in a loss of bone mass throughout the entire skeleton. Fragility fractures, either vertebral or nonvertebral, have a considerable adverse effect on quality of life in women with osteoporosis and place a significant burden on society in terms of healthcare costs.Management of postmenopausal osteoporosis includes alteration of modifiable risk factors (e.g. lifestyle and propensity to fall), ensuring adequate calcium and vitamin D intake, and pharmacological treatment to decrease fracture risk by slowing or preventing bone loss and preserving bone strength. Raloxifene (Evista®), a selective estrogen receptor modulator that partially mimics the effects of estrogen on bone and lipid metabolism and acts as an antiestrogen in the breast and endometrium, is indicated for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Raloxifene increases bone mineral density at vertebral and nonvertebral sites, and decreases the risk of vertebral fracture to a similar extent to the bisphosphonates alendronate and risedronate. However, effects on nonvertebral fracture risk, including the risk of hip fracture, have not been observed.Raloxifene appears to reduce breast cancer risk (in women at average risk) and cardiovascular risk (in women at increased risk) without stimulating the endometrium, and does not cause vaginal bleeding or breast pain. However, the drug causes hot flashes in some women, and increases the risk of venous thromboembolic events by about the same amount as hormone replacement therapy (HRT).In economic models, raloxifene is cost effective compared with no treatment, HRT, calcitonin, or alendronate for the prevention or treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.In conclusion, raloxifene is a valuable and cost-effective therapy for preventing the progression of osteoporosis and for reducing vertebral fracture risk in osteoporotic postmenopausal women. The tendency for raloxifene to cause hot flashes, and its apparent lack of effect on hip fracture risk, may preclude its use in women with vasomotor symptoms and in patients at high risk for hip fracture. Results from large ongoing trials are needed to confirm the effects of raloxifene on breast cancer and cardiovascular disease. However, the effects of raloxifene on breast cancer and cardiovascular risk without stimulating the endometrium make the drug an attractive therapy for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis.     

It won't happen to me: lower perception of heart disease risk among women with family histories of breast cancer

BACKGROUND: The threat that breast cancer poses to American women, particularly to women with family histories of the disease, has received widespread attention in both medical and popular literatures. While this emphasis may have laudable consequences on breast cancer screening, it may also have a negative consequence, obscuring women's recognition of their risks for other health threats, such as heart disease. This study examined the possibility that women with family histories of breast cancer may be particularly susceptible to overestimating their risks of breast cancer while minimizing their risks of cardiovascular disease. METHODS: Healthy women with (n = 73) and without n = 104) family histories of breast cancer (64% African American, 26% Caucasian, 10% other ethnicities, mean age 41.7 years) were recruited from medical centers in New York City, and completed questionnaires concerning their family histories and perceptions of risk. RESULTS: Consistent with the study hypothesis, women with family histories of breast cancer had significantly higher perceived lifetime risk of breast cancer (P<0.0002) but lower perceived lifetime risk of heart disease (P<0.002) than women without family histories. Additionally, women with family histories of breast cancer had lower perceived colon cancer risk (P<0.02), suggesting that women with family histories of breast cancer may be underestimating their risks for a variety of diseases. CONCLUSION: The emphasis on breast cancer risk, especially for women with family histories of the disease, may need to be balanced by educational efforts concerning women's risk of other diseases, particularly cardiovascular disease.     

‘It can’t do any harm’: A qualitative exploration of accounts of participation in preventive health checks

Assessing and managing risk are central to participation in preventive health checks, as the purpose is to identify adverse health behaviours and risk factors. Drawing on the cultural theory of risk, we explore why people without formal education participate in preventive health checks and discuss how this is related to their understandings of risk and health. With this aim, we conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with people without formal education who participated in the intervention study Check-in. Check-in evaluated the effect of an invitation of people aged 45–64 without formal education beyond lower secondary school (grades 7–9) to a prescheduled preventive health check in general practice. In this way, Check-in provided the empirical context of this study. Within our analysis we identified four participation styles representing different ways of participating in preventive health checks: 1) selective participation, 2) participation to control uncertainty, 3) feeling an obligation to participate and 4) participation to change the healthcare system. Across the participation styles, we found that participants attended the preventive health check for reasons other than getting help to change their health behaviour and that the accounts of participation were socially embedded. Participants ascribed and assessed risk and health in relation to their immediate network and everyday lives and thereby presented risk perceptions differently from the general preventive messages. From these findings we suggest that preventive health checks should be based on participants’ context-dependent needs.