Tag: iab-technology industry

Getting prescription meds via telehealth might change soon. Here’s how to prepare | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN’s Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.



CNN
 — 

For three years now, the expansion of telehealth has made care more accessible for many people, especially those in rural areas. Patients have been able to receive prescriptions from providers without seeing them in person. But that may change come May 11 when the federal government is set to end the Covid-19 public health emergency declaration that made this convenience possible.

Before the pandemic, medical practitioners were subject to the conditions of the Ryan Haight Act, which required at least one in-person examination before prescribing a controlled medicine, said Dr. Shabana Khan, chair of the American Psychiatric Association’s Committee on Telepsychiatry.

“There are seven exceptions, and one of them is a public health emergency declared by the secretary of (health and human services), which is what we’ve had for the past three years,” Khan said. “It was immensely helpful … and allowed many Americans to get their medical care without having to come in person, so we could treat patients completely remotely.”

“The administration and HHS has put out a notice that they don’t intend to renew it any further,” Khan said, “so the federal public health emergency is going to be expiring May 11.”

Returning to pre-pandemic rules means people who were prescribed controlled medications via telehealth — such as stimulant medications for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, benzodiazepines for anxiety, or medications for opioid use disorder, sleep or pain — will need one in-person medical examination to continue these prescriptions or start new ones.

The US Drug Enforcement Administration’s website has a general list of controlled substances, and an exhaustive list can be found here.

Patients will still be able to get prescriptions for non-controlled medications, such as antibiotics or birth control, via telehealth. The pre-pandemic rules also wouldn’t affect telehealth care by a practitioner who has already conducted an in-person examination of a patient.

To establish some flexibility in the telehealth framework moving forward, Khan said, the DEA has put forth proposals (PDF) that would allow telehealth practitioners to prescribe one 30-day supply of buprenorphine — a medication for opioid use disorder — or Schedule III-V non-narcotic controlled medications without doing an in-person examination first. A patient would have to do an in-person exam before the second prescription of either type of medication, according to those proposals.

But there’s no guarantee that will happen — public comment on the proposals was open through March; since then, the DEA has been considering comments before drafting final regulations.

“It is really important to start planning now,” Khan said. “For many medicines, it can be a risk to abruptly stop treatment.”

People who are on medications for opioid use disorder, ADHD or anxiety and don’t get an in-person exam between May 11 and the next time they need a prescription refill could experience withdrawal requiring a trip to the hospital, or negative effects on health, relationships, employment or academics, she added.

Here’s what else you should know about the changes and steps you should take, according to Khan.

This conversation has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity.

CNN: How should people prepare to ensure their prescription routine isn’t disrupted?

Khan: It’s important for patients who may be prescribed one of these types of medicines by a telemedicine physician or other practitioner to reach out to that practitioner to discuss this issue and make sure that they have a plan. And if it’s feasible to see that telemedicine physician in person, schedule that as soon as possible.

CNN: What if you can’t see your telehealth provider in person?

Khan: Let’s say a telemedicine physician practices completely remotely — then the patient would discuss with them what next steps would be.

In the proposed rule, the qualifying telemedicine referral may allow a patient to be seen by a local DEA-registered practitioner. So, for example, perhaps their primary care doctor or pediatrician — if they are DEA-registered — might be able to go through the qualifying telemedicine referral process so that they can see them in person and continue to be prescribed the medicine. Or patients can contact their health insurance provider to get a list of local referrals.

CNN: Are there any drawbacks to seeing general physicians or pediatricians for controlled medication prescriptions?

Khan: Some may say they aren’t going to prescribe certain medications, like psychiatric medications. Some may say they are comfortable with it, and some may say they will prescribe for a short period of time until you connect with a specialist. So there is variability.

CNN: Would the patient have to continue seeing the referral provider after that first in-person appointment?

Khan: In terms of what’s required at the federal level, if a patient has that one in-person exam with a provider through that qualifying telemedicine referral process, they wouldn’t necessarily have to see that provider again unless that’s part of their treatment plan that’s discussed.

With the qualifying telemedicine referral in the proposed rule, the way it’s written, it doesn’t necessarily have to be the referral practitioner prescribing the medicine; they just need to do the in-person exam. The referral practitioner can refer the patient back to the telemedicine doctor, who can prescribe the medicine.

The other factor that’s significant here is we discussed all the proposed rules and the status at the federal level, but there’s also the state level. States also have rules around controlled medicine prescribing, and they may not always align with federal law. Let’s say the DEA puts out their final rule, and there’s some flexibility — some states might adopt the older Ryan Haight Act language from the federal level, so they might actually be stricter than what we’ll be seeing at the federal level. When federal and state laws don’t align, providers generally have to follow whatever is stricter.

CNN: Will patients need to see their provider in person every time they need a prescription refill?

Khan: The DEA has indicated that the absolute requirement at the federal level is one in-person examination. Beyond that, it would be left to the discretion of whoever the patient is seeing.

Source link

#prescription #meds #telehealth #change #Heres #prepare #CNN

How confusion about textured hairstyles can prevent some patients from getting necessary medical imaging | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



KFF Health News
 — 

Sadé Lewis of Queens, New York, has suffered migraines since she was a kid, and as she started college, they got worse. A recent change in her insurance left the 27-year-old looking for a new neurologist. That’s when she found West 14 Street MedicalArts in New York.

MedicalArts recommended that she get an electroencephalogram (EEG) and an MRI to make sure her brain was functioning properly.

An EEG is a test to measure the electrical activity of the brain. It can find changes in brain activity that can help in diagnosing conditions including epilepsy, sleep disorders, and brain tumors. During the procedure, electrodes consisting of small metal discs with attached wires are pasted onto the scalp using adhesive, or attached to an electrode cap that you wear on your head.

A little over a week before her EEG, Lewis was given instructions that she didn’t remember getting before a previous EEG appointment.

To Lewis’ surprise, patients were told to remove all hair extensions, braids, cornrows, wigs, etc. Also, she was to wash her hair with a mild shampoo the night before the appointment and not use any conditioners, hair creams, sprays, oils, or styling gels.

“The first thing I literally did was text it to my best friend, and I was, like, this is kind of anti-Black,” Lewis said. “I just feel like it creates a bunch of confusion, and it alienates patients who obviously need these procedures done.”

The restrictions could discourage people with thick, curly, and textured hair from going forward with their care. People with more permanent styles like locs — a hairstyle in which hair strands are coiled, braided, twisted, or palm-rolled to create a rope-like appearance — might be barred from getting the test done.

Kinky or curly hair textures are typically more delicate and susceptible to damage. As a result, people with curlier hair textures often wear protective hairstyles, such as weaves, braids, and twists, which help maintain hair length and health by keeping the ends of the hair tucked away and minimizing manipulation.

After receiving the instructions, Lewis scoured the internet and social media channels to see if she could find more information on best practices. But she noticed that for people with thick and textured hair, there were few tips on best hairstyles for an EEG.

Lewis has thick, curly hair and believed that explicitly following the instructions on the preparation worksheet would make it harder, not easier, for the technician to reach her scalp. Lewis decided that her mini-twists — a protective style in which the hair is parted into small sections and twisted — would be the best way for her to show up to the appointment with clean and product-free hair that still allowed for easy access to her scalp.

Lewis felt comfortable with her plan and did not think about it again until she received a reminder email the day before her EEG and MRI appointment that restated the restrictive instructions and added a warning: Failure to comply would result in the appointment being rescheduled and a $50 same-day cancellation fee.

To avoid the penalty, Lewis emailed the facility with her concerns and attached photos.

“I got kind of worried, and I sent them pictures of my hair thinking that it would go well, and they would be, like, ‘Oh yeah, that’s fine. We see what you see,’” said Lewis.

Soon after, she received a call from the facility and was told she would not be able to get the procedure done with her hair in the twists. After the call, Lewis posted a TikTok video detailing the conversation. She expressed her frustration and felt that the person on the phone was “close-minded.”

“As a Black woman, that is so exclusionary for coarse and thick hair. To literally have no product in your hair and show up with it loose, you’re not even reaching my scalp with that,” Lewis said in her video.

The comments section on Lewis’ TikTok video is full of people sharing in her frustration and confusion or recounting similar experiences with EEG scheduling.

West 14 Street MedicalArts declined to comment for this article.

The New York medical center is not the only facility with similar EEG prep instructions. The Neurology Center, which has several locations in the Washington, D.C., area, provides EEG pretest instructions for patients reading, “Please remove any hair extensions or additions. Do not use hair treatment products such as hair spray, conditioners, or hair dressing, nor should you fix your hair in tight braids or corn rows.”

Marc Hanna, the neurophysiology supervisor at the center’s White Oak location in Silver Spring, Maryland, has more than 30 years of experience performing EEGs. He oversees 10-12 EEG technicians at the facility.

Hanna said the hair rules are meant to help a technician get an accurate reading from the test. “The electrodes need to sit flat on the scalp, and they need to be in precise spots on the scalp that are equally apart from each other,” Hanna said.

For people with thick and curly hair, this can be a challenge.

A 2020 article from Science News detailed a study that measured how much coarse, curly hair could interfere with measuring brain signals. A good EEG signal is considered to have less than 50 kilo-Ohms of impedance, but the researchers found unbraided, curly hair with standard electrodes yielded 615 kilo-Ohms.

Researchers are working to better capture brain waves of people with naturally thick and curly hair. Joy Jackson, a biomedical engineering major at the University of Miami, developed a clip-like device that can help electrodes better adhere to the scalp.

Experimentation with different braiding patterns and flexible electrode clips shaped like dragonfly wings, designed to push under the braids, has had promising results. A study, published by bioRxiv, found this method resulted in a reading well within the range for a reliable EEG measurement.

But more research has to be done before products like these are widely used by medical facilities.

Hanna said the facility where he works does not automatically ask patients to remove their protective styles because sometimes the technician can complete the test without them doing so.

“Each one of those cases are an individual case,” Hanna said. “So, at our facility, we don’t ask the patient to take all their braids out. We just ask them to come in. Sometimes, if one of the technicians are available when the patient is scheduling, they’ll just look at the hair and say, ‘OK, we can do it’ or ‘We don’t think we can do it.’ And we even might say, ‘We don’t think we can do it but come in and we’ll try.’”

In practice, Hanna said, it’s not common for hair to be an issue. But for patients whose hairstyle might make the test inaccurate, he said, it becomes a conversation between the doctor and the patient.

When Lewis arrived the following day for her MRI and EEG appointment, she was told her EEG had been canceled.

“It was just kind of baffling a little bit because, literally, as soon as I walk in, I saw about four different Black women who all had either twists, locs, braids, or something,” she said. “And on the call, the woman was saying if you come in and my hair is not loose, we’re going to charge you. And she did recommend to cancel my appointment. But I never approved that.”

After Lewis explained what happened during the phone call, she said, the receptionist was very apologetic and said the information Lewis was given was not true. Lewis said she spoke with one of the EEG technicians at the facility to confirm that her mini-twists would work for the test — and felt a sigh of relief when she saw the technician was also a Black woman.

“The technician, I think overall, they just made me feel safe,” Lewis said. “Because I felt like they could identify with me just from a cultural standpoint, a racial standpoint. So, it did make me feel a little bit more valid in my feelings.”

Lewis later returned to the facility to get the procedure done while still wearing mini-twists. This time, the process was seamless.

Her advice for other patients? “When you feel something, definitely speak out, ask questions.”

Source link

#confusion #textured #hairstyles #prevent #patients #medical #imaging #CNN

Breast density changes over time could be linked to breast cancer risk, study finds | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

Breast density is known to naturally decrease as a woman ages, and now a study suggests that the more time it takes for breast density to decline, the more likely it is that the woman could develop breast cancer.

Researchers have long known that women with dense breasts have a higher risk of breast cancer. But according to the study, published last week in the journal JAMA Oncology, the rate of breast density changes over time also appears to be associated with the risk of cancer being diagnosed in that breast.

“We know that invasive breast cancer is rarely diagnosed simultaneously in both breasts, thus it is not a surprise that we have observed a much slower decline in the breast that eventually developed breast cancer compared to the natural decline in density with age,” Shu Jiang, an associate professor of surgery at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and first author of the new study, wrote in an email.

Breast density refers to the amount of fibrous and glandular tissue in a person’s breasts compared with the amount of fatty tissue in the breasts – and breast density can be seen on a mammogram.

“Because women have their mammograms taken annually or biennially, the change of breast density over time is naturally available,” Jiang said in the email. “We should make full use of this dynamic information to better inform risk stratification and guide more individualized screening and prevention approaches.”

The researchers, from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, analyzed health data over the course of 10 years among 947 women in the St. Louis region who completed routine mammograms. A mammogram is an X-ray picture of the breast that doctors use to look for early signs of breast cancer.

The women in the study were recruited from November 2008 to April 2012, and they had gotten mammograms through October 2020. The average age of the participants was around 57.

Among the women, there were 289 cases of breast cancer diagnosed, and the researchers found that breast density was higher at the start of the study for the women who later developed breast cancer compared with those who remained cancer-free.

The researchers also found that there was a significant decrease in breast density among all the women over the course of 10 years, regardless of whether they later developed breast cancer, but the rate of density decreasing over time was significantly slower among breasts in which cancer was later diagnosed.

“This study found that evaluating longitudinal changes in breast density from digital mammograms may offer an additional tool for assessing risk of breast cancer and subsequent risk reduction strategies,” the researchers wrote.

Not only is breast density a known risk factor for breast cancer, dense breast tissue can make mammograms more difficult to read.

“There are two issues here. First, breast density can make it more difficult to fully ‘see through’ the breast on a mammogram, like looking through a frosted glass. Thus, it can be harder to detect a breast cancer,” Dr. Hal Burstein, clinical investigator in the Breast Oncology Center at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, who was not involved in the new study, said in an email. “Secondly, breast density is often thought to reflect the estrogen exposure or estrogen levels in women, and the greater the estrogen exposure, the greater the risk of developing breast cancer.”

In March, the US Food and Drug Administration published updates to its mammography regulations, requiring mammography facilities to notify patients about the density of their breasts.

“Breast density can have a masking effect on mammography, where it can be more difficult to find a breast cancer within an area of dense breast tissue,” Jiang wrote in her email.

“Even when you take away the issue of finding it, breast density is an independent risk factor for developing breast cancer. Although there is lots of data that tell us dense breast tissue is a risk factor, the reason for this is not clear,” she said. “It may be that development of dense tissue and cancer are related to the same biological processes or hormonal influences.”

The findings of the new study demonstrate that breast density serves as a risk factor for breast cancer – but women should be aware of their other risk factors too, said Dr. Maxine Jochelson, chief of the breast imaging service at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, who was not involved in the study.

“It makes sense to some extent that the longer your breast stays dense, theoretically, the more likely it is to develop cancer. And so basically, it expands on the data that dense breasts are a risk,” Jochelson said, adding that women with dense breasts should ask for supplemental imaging when they get mammograms.

But other factors that can raise the risk of breast cancer include having a family history of cancer, drinking too much alcohol, having a high-risk lesion biopsied from the breast or having a certain genetic mutation.

For instance, women should know that “density may not affect their risk so much if they have the breast cancer BRCA 1 or 2 mutation because their risk is so high that it may not make it much higher,” Jochelson said.

Some ways to reduce the risk of breast cancer include keeping a healthy weight, being physically active, drinking alcohol in moderation or not at all and, for some people, taking medications such as tamoxifen and breastfeeding your children, if possible.

“Breast density is a modest risk factor. The ‘average’ woman in the US has a 1 in 8 lifetime chance of developing breast cancer. Women with dense breasts have a slightly greater risk, about 1 in 6, or 1 in 7. So the lifetime risk goes up from 12% to 15%. That still means that most women with dense breasts will not develop breast cancer,” Burstein said in his email.

“Sometimes radiologists will recommend additional breast imaging to women with dense breast tissue on mammograms,” he added.

The US Preventive Services Task Force – a group of independent medical experts whose recommendations help guide doctors’ decisions – recommends biennial screening for women starting at age 50. The task force says that a decision to start screening earlier “should be an individual one.” Many medical groups, including the American Cancer Society and Mayo Clinic, emphasize that women have the option to start screening with a mammogram every year starting at age 40.

“It’s also very clear that breast density tends to be highest in younger women, premenopausal women, and for almost all women, it tends to go down with age. However, the risk of breast cancer goes up with age. So these two things are a little bit at odds with each other,” said Dr. Freya Schnabel, director of breast surgery at NYU Langone’s Perlmutter Cancer Center and professor of surgery at NYU Grossman School of Medicine in New York, who was not involved in the new study.

“So if you’re a 40-year-old woman and your breasts are dense, you could think about that as just being really kind of age-appropriate,” she said. “The take-home message that’s very, very practical and pragmatic right now is that if you have dense breasts, whatever your age is, even if you’re postmenopausal – maybe even specifically, if you are postmenopausal – and your breasts are not getting less dense the way the average woman’s does, that it really is a reason to seek out adjunctive imaging in addition to just mammography, to use additional diagnostic tools, like ultrasound or maybe even MRI, if there are other risk factors.”

Source link

#Breast #density #time #linked #breast #cancer #risk #study #finds #CNN

When we’ll be able to 3D-print organs and who will be able to afford them | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sign up for CNN’s Wonder Theory science newsletter. Explore the universe with news on fascinating discoveries, scientific advancements and more.



CNN
 — 

What if doctors could just print a kidney, using cells from the patient, instead of having to find a donor match and hope the patient’s body doesn’t reject the transplanted kidney?

The soonest that could happen is in a decade, thanks to 3D organ bioprinting, said Jennifer Lewis, a professor at Harvard University’s Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering. Organ bioprinting is the use of 3D-printing technologies to assemble multiple cell types, growth factors and biomaterials in a layer-by-layer fashion to produce bioartificial organs that ideally imitate their natural counterparts, according to a 2019 study.

This type of regenerative medicine is in the development stage, and the driving force behind this innovation is “real human need,” Lewis said.

In the United States, there are 106,800 men, women and children on the national organ transplant waiting list as of March 8, 2023, according to the Health Resources & Services Administration. However, living donors provide only around 6,000 organs per year on average, and there are about 8,000 deceased donors annually who each provide 3.5 organs on average.

The cause of this discrepancy is “a combination of people who undergo catastrophic health events, but their organs aren’t high enough quality to donate, or they’re not on the organ donor list to begin with, and the fact that it’s actually very difficult to find a good match” so the patient’s body doesn’t reject the transplanted organ, Lewis said.

And even though living donors are an option, “to do surgery on someone who doesn’t need it” is a big risk, said Dr. Anthony Atala, director of the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine. “So, living related donors are usually not the preferred way to go because then you’re taking an organ away from somebody else who may need it, especially now as we age longer.”

Atala and his colleagues were responsible for growing human bladders in a lab by hand in 2006, and implanting a complicated internal organ into people for the first time — saving the lives of three children in whom they implanted the bladders.

Every day, 17 people die waiting for an organ transplant, according to the Health Resources & Services Administration. And every 10 minutes, another person is added to the waitlist, the agency says. More than 90% of the people on the transplant list in 2021 needed a kidney.

“About a million people worldwide are in need of a kidney. So they have end-stage renal failure, and they have to go on dialysis,” Lewis said. “Once you go on dialysis, you have essentially five years to live, and every year, your mortality rate increases by 15%. Dialysis is very hard on your body. So this is really motivating to take on this grand challenge of printing organs.”

“Anti-hypertensive pills are not scarce. Everybody who needs them can get them,” Martine Rothblatt, CEO and chairman of United Therapeutics, said in June 2022 at the Life Itself conference, a health and wellness event presented in partnership with CNN. United Therapeutics was one of the conference sponsors.

“There is no practical reason why anybody who needs a kidney — or a lung, a heart, a liver — should not be able to get one,” she added. “We’re using technology to solve this problem.”

To begin the process of bioprinting an organ, doctors typically start with a patient’s own cells. They take a small needle biopsy of an organ or do a minimally invasive surgical procedure that removes a small piece of tissue, “less than half the size of a postage stamp,” Atala said. “By taking this small piece of tissue, we are able to tease cells apart (and) we grow and expand the cells outside the body.”

This growth happens inside a sterile incubator or bioreactor, a pressurized stainless steel vessel that helps the cells stay fed with nutrients — called “media” — the doctors feed them every 24 hours, since cells have their own metabolism, Lewis said. Each cell type has a different media, and the incubator or bioreactor acts as an oven-like device mimicking the internal temperature and oxygenation of the human body, Atala said.

“Then we mix it with this gel, which is like a glue,” Atala said. “Every organ in your body has the cells and the glue that holds it together. Basically, that’s also called ‘extracellular matrix.’”

This glue is Atala’s nickname for bioink, a printable mixture of living cells, water-rich molecules called hydrogels, and the media and growth factors that help the cells continue to proliferate and differentiate, Lewis said. The hydrogels mimic the human body’s extracellular matrix, which contains substances including proteins, collagen and hyaluronic acid.

The non-cell sample portion of the glue can be made in a lab, and “is going to have the same properties of the tissue you’re trying to replace,” Atala said.

The biomaterials used typically have to be nontoxic, biodegradable and biocompatible to avoid a negative immune response, Lewis said. Collagen and gelatin are two of the most common biomaterials used for bioprinting tissues or organs.

From there, doctors load each bioink — depending on how many cell types they’re wanting to print — into a printing chamber, “using a printhead and nozzle to extrude an ink and build the material up layer by layer,” Lewis said. Creating tissue with personalized properties is enabled by printers being programmed with a patient’s imaging data from X-rays or scans, Atala said.

“With a color printer you have several different cartridges, and each cartridge is printing a different color, and you come up with your (final) color,” Atala added. Bioprinting is the same; you’re just using cells instead of traditional inks.

How long the printing process takes depends on several factors, including the organ or tissue being printed, the fineness of the resolution and the number of printheads needed, Lewis said. But it typically lasts a few to several hours. The time from the biopsy to the implantation is about four to six weeks, Atala said.

A 3D printer seeds different types of cells onto a kidney scaffold at the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine.

The ultimate challenge is “getting the organs to actually function as they should,” so accomplishing that “is the holy grail,” Lewis said.

“Just like if you were to harvest an organ from a donor, you have to immediately get that organ into a bioreactor and start perfusing it or the cells die,” she added. To perfuse an organ is to supply it with fluid, usually blood or a blood substitute, by circulating it through blood vessels or other channels.

Depending on the organ’s complexity, there is sometimes a need to mature the tissue further in a bioreactor or further drive connections, Lewis said. “There’s just a number of plumbing issues and challenges that have to be done in order to make that printed organ actually function like a human organ would in vivo (meaning in the body). And honestly, this has not been fully solved yet.”

Once a bioprinted organ is implanted into a patient, it will naturally degrade over time — which is OK since that’s how it’s designed to work.

“You’re probably wondering, ‘Well, then what happens to the tissue? Will it fall apart?’ Actually, no,” Atala said. “These glues dissolve, and the cells sense that the bridge is giving way; they sense that they don’t have a firm footing anymore. So cells do what they do in your very own body, which is to create their own bridge and create their own glue.”

Atala and Lewis are conservative in their estimates about the number of years remaining before fully functioning bioprinted organs can be implanted into humans.

“The field’s moving fast, but I mean, I think we’re talking about a decade plus, even with all of the tremendous progress that’s been made,” Lewis said.

“I learned so many years ago never to predict because you’ll always be wrong,” Atala said. “There’s so many factors in terms of manufacturing and the (US Food and Drug Administration regulation). At the end of the day, our interest, of course, is to make sure the technologies are safe for the patient above all.”

Whenever bioprinting organs becomes an available option, affordability for patients and their caregivers shouldn’t be an issue.

They’ll be “accessible for sure,” Atala said. “The costs associated with organ failures are very high. Just to keep a patient on dialysis is over a quarter of a million dollars per year, just to keep one patient on dialysis. So, it’s a lot cheaper to create an organ that you can implant into the patient.”

The average kidney transplant cost was $442,500 in 2020, according to research published by the American Society of Nephrology — while 3D printers retail for around a few thousand dollars to upward of $100,000, depending on their complexity. But even though low-cost printers are available, pricey parts of bioprinting can include maintaining cell banks for patients, culturing cells and safely handling biological materials, Lewis said.

Some of the major costs of current organ transplantation are “harvesting the organ from the donor, the transport costs and then, of course, the surgery that the recipient goes through, and then all the care and monitoring,” Lewis said. “Some of that cost would still be in play, even if it was bioprinted.”

Source link

#3Dprint #organs #afford #CNN

Most Americans are uncomfortable with artificial intelligence in health care, survey finds | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

Most Americans feel “significant discomfort” about the idea of their doctors using artificial intelligence to help manage their health, a new survey finds, but they generally acknowledge AI’s potential to reduce medical mistakes and to eliminate some of the problems doctors may have with racial bias.

Artificial intelligence is the theory and development of computer programs that can solve problems and perform tasks that typically would require human intelligence – machines that can essentially learn like humans can, based on the input they have been given.

You probably already use technology that relies on artificial intelligence every day without even thinking about it.

When you shop on Amazon, for example, it’s artificial intelligence that guides the site to recommend cat toys if you’ve previously shopped for cat food. AI can also help unlock your iPhone, drive your Tesla, answer customer service questions at your bank and recommend the next show to binge on Netflix.

Americans may like these individualized services, but when it comes to AI and their health care, it may be a digital step too far for many.

Sixty percent of Americans who took part in a new survey by the Pew Research Center said that they would be uncomfortable with a health care provider who relied on artificial intelligence to do something like diagnose their disease or recommend a treatment. About 57% said that the use of artificial intelligence would make their relationship with their provider worse.

Only 38% felt that using AI to diagnose disease or recommend treatment would lead to better health outcomes; 33% said it would lead to worse outcomes; and 27% said it wouldn’t make much of a difference.

About 6 in 10 Americans said they would not want AI-driven robots to perform parts of their surgery. Nor do they like the idea of a chatbot working with them on their mental health; 79% said they wouldn’t want AI involved in their mental health care. There’s also concern about security when it comes to AI and health care records.

“Awareness of AI is still developing. So one dynamic here is, the public isn’t deeply familiar with all of these technologies. And so when you consider their use in a context that’s very personal, something that’s kind of high-stakes as your own health, I think that the notion that folks are still getting to know this technology is certainly one dynamic at play,” said Alec Tyson, Pew’s associate director of research.

The findings, released Wednesday, are based on a survey of 11,004 US adults conducted from December 12-18 using the center’s American Trends Panel, an online survey group recruited through random sampling of residential addresses across the country. Pew weights the survey to reflect US demographics including race, gender, ethnicity, education and political party affiliation.

The respondents expressed concern over the speed of the adoption of AI in health and medicine. Americans generally would prefer that health care providers move with caution and carefully consider the consequences of AI adoption, Tyson said.

But they’re not totally anti-AI when it comes to health care. They’re comfortable with using it to detect skin cancer, for instance; 65% thought it could improve the accuracy of a diagnosis. Some dermatologists are already exploring the use of AI technology in skin cancer diagnosis, with some limited success.

Four in 10 Americans think AI could also help providers make fewer mistakes, which are a serious problem in health care. A 2022 study found that medical errors cost about $20 billion a year and result in about 100,000 deaths each year.

Some Americans also think AI may be able to build more equity into the health care system.

Studies have shown that most providers have some form of implicit bias, with more positive attitudes toward White patients and negative attitudes toward people of color, and that could affect their decision-making.

Among the survey participants who understand that this kind of bias exists, the predominant view was that AI could help when it came to diagnosing a disease or recommending treatments, making those decisions more data-driven.

Tyson said that when people were asked to describe in their own words how they thought AI would help fight bias, one participant cited class bias: They believed that, unlike a human provider, an AI program wouldn’t make assumptions about a person’s health based on the way they dressed for the appointment.

“So this is a sense that AI is more neutral or at least less biased than humans,” Tyson said. However, AI is developed with human input, so experts caution that it may not always be entirely without bias.

Pew’s earlier surveys about artificial intelligence have found a general openness to AI, he said, particularly when it’s used to augment, rather than replace, human decision-making.

“AI as just a piece of the process in helping a human make a judgment, there is a good amount of support for that,” Tyson said. “Less so for AI to be the final decision-maker.”

For years, radiologists have used AI to analyze x-rays and CT scans to look for cancer and improve diagnostic capacity. About 30% of radiologists use AI as a part of their practice, and that number is growing, a survey found – but more than 90% in that survey said they wouldn’t trust these tools for autonomous use.

Dr. Victor Tseng, a pulmonologist and medical director of California-based Ansible Health, said that his practice is one of many that have been exploring the AI program ChatGPT. His group has set up a committee to look into its uses and to discuss the ethics around using it so the practice could set up guardrails before putting it into clinical practice.

Tseng’s group published a study this month that showed that ChatGPT could correctly answer enough practice questions that it would have passed the US Medical Licensing Examination.

Tseng said he doesn’t believe that AI will ever replace doctors, but he thinks technology like ChatGPT could make the medical profession more accessible. For example, a doctor could ask ChatGPT to simplify complicated medical jargon so that someone with a seventh-grade education could understand.

“AI is here. The doors are open,” Tseng said.

The Pew survey findings suggest that attitudes could shift as more Americans become more familiar with artificial intelligence. Survey respondents who were more familiar with a technology were more supportive of it, but they still shared caution that doctors could move too quickly in adopting it.

“Whether you’ve heard a lot about AI, just a little or maybe even nothing at all, all of those segments of the public are really in the same space,” Tyson said. “They echo this sentiment of caution of wanting to move carefully in AI adoption in health care.”

Source link

#Americans #uncomfortable #artificial #intelligence #health #care #survey #finds #CNN

For the first time, US task force proposes expanding high blood pressure screening recommendations during pregnancy | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

The US Preventive Services Task Force has released a draft recommendation to screen everyone who is pregnant for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, by monitoring their blood pressure throughout the pregnancy, and the group is calling attention to racial inequities.

This is the first time the task force has proposed expanding these screening recommendations to include all hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, which are on the rise in the United States.

It means the average person might notice their doctor paying closer attention to their blood pressure measurements during pregnancy, as well as doctors screening not just for preeclampsia but for all disorders related to high blood pressure.

The draft recommendation statement and evidence review were posted online Tuesday for public comment. The statement is consistent with a 2017 statement that recommends screening with blood pressure measurements throughout pregnancy.

It was already recommended for blood pressure measurements to be taken during every prenatal visit, but “the difference is now really highlighting the importance of that – that this is a single approach that is very effective,” said Dr. Esa Davis, a member of the task force and associate professor of medicine at the University of Pittsburgh.

The draft recommendation urges doctors to monitor blood pressure during pregnancy as a “screening tool” for hypertensive disorders, she said, and this may reduce the risk of some hypertensive disorders among moms-to-be going undiagnosed or untreated.

“Since the process of screening and the clinical management is similar for all the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, we’re broadening looking at screening for all of the hypertensive disorders, so gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia,” Davis said.

The US Preventive Services Task Force, created in 1984, is a group of independent volunteer medical experts whose recommendations help guide doctors’ decisions. All recommendations are published on the task force’s website or in a peer-reviewed journal.

To make this most recent draft recommendation, the task force reviewed data on different approaches to screening for hypertensive disorders during pregnancy from studies published between January 2014 and January 2022, and it re-examined earlier research that had been reviewed for former recommendations.

“Screening using blood pressure during pregnancy at every prenatal encounter is a long-standing standard clinical practice that identifies hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; however, morbidity and mortality related to these conditions persists,” the separate Evidence-Based Practice Center, which informed the task force’s draft recommendation, wrote in the evidence review.

“Most pregnant people have their blood pressure taken at some point during pregnancy, and for many, a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy is first diagnosed at the time of delivery,” it wrote. “Diagnoses made late offer less time for evaluation and stabilization and may limit intervention options. Future implementation research is needed to improve access to regular blood pressure measurement earlier in pregnancy and possibly continuing in the weeks following delivery.”

The draft recommendation is a “B recommendation,” meaning the task force recommends that clinicians offer or provide the service, as there is either a high certainty that it’s moderately beneficial or moderate certainty that it’s highly beneficial.

For this particular recommendation, the task force concluded with moderate certainty that screening for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy, with blood pressure measurements, has a substantial net benefit.

Hypertensive disorders in pregnancy appear to be on the rise in the United States.

Data published last year by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows that, between 2017 and 2019, the prevalence of hypertensive disorders among hospital deliveries increased from 13.3% to 15.9%, affecting at least 1 in 7 deliveries in the hospital during that time period.

Among deaths during delivery in the hospital, 31.6% – about 1 in 3 – had a documented diagnosis code for hypertensive disorder during pregnancy.

Older women, Black women and American Indian and Alaska Native women were at higher risk of hypertensive disorders, according to the data. The disorders were documented in approximately 1 in 3 delivery hospitalizations among women ages 45 to 55.

The prevalence of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy was 20.9% among Black women, 16.4% among American Indian and Alaska Native women, 14.7% among White women, 12.5% among Hispanic women and 9.3% among Asian or Pacific Islander women.

The task force’s new draft recommendation could help raise awareness around those racial disparities and how Black and Native American women are at higher risk, Davis said.

“If this helps to increase awareness to make sure these high-risk groups are screened, that is something that is very, very important about this new recommendation,” she said. “It helps to get more women screened. It puts it more on the radar that they will then not just be screened but have the surveillance and the treatment that is offered based off of that screening.”

Communities of color are at the highest risk for hypertensive disorders during pregnancy, and “it’s very related to social determinants of health and access to care,” said Dr. Ilan Shapiro, chief health correspondent and medical affairs officer for the federally qualified community health center AltaMed Health Services in California. He was not involved with the task force or its draft recommendation.

Social determinants of health refer to the conditions and environments in which people live that can have a significant effect on their access to care, such as their income, housing, safety, and not living near sources for healthy food or easy transportation.

These social determinants of health, Shapiro said, “make a huge difference for the mother and baby.”

Hypertensive disorders during pregnancy can be controlled with regular monitoring during prenatal visits, he said, and the expectant mother would need access to care.

Eating healthy foods and getting regular exercise also can help get high blood pressure under control, and some blood pressure medications are considered safe to use during pregnancy, but patients should consult with their doctor.

Source link

#time #task #force #proposes #expanding #high #blood #pressure #screening #recommendations #pregnancy #CNN

Paging Dr. AI? What ChatGPT and artificial intelligence could mean for the future of medicine | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

Without cracking a single textbook, without spending a day in medical school, the co-author of a preprint study correctly answered enough practice questions that it would have passed the real US Medical Licensing Examination.

But the test-taker wasn’t a member of Mensa or a medical savant; it was the artificial intelligence ChatGPT.

The tool, which was created to answer user questions in a conversational manner, has generated so much buzz that doctors and scientists are trying to determine what its limitations are – and what it could do for health and medicine.

ChatGPT, or Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer, is a natural language-processing tool driven by artificial intelligence.

The technology, created by San Francisco-based OpenAI and launched in November, is not like a well-spoken search engine. It isn’t even connected to the internet. Rather, a human programmer feeds it a vast amount of online data that’s kept on a server.

It can answer questions even if it has never seen a particular sequence of words before, because ChatGPT’s algorithm is trained to predict what word will come up in a sentence based on the context of what comes before it. It draws on knowledge stored on its server to generate its response.

ChatGPT can also answer followup questions, admit mistakes and reject inappropriate questions, the company says. It’s free to try while its makers are testing it.

Artificial intelligence programs have been around for a while, but this one generated so much interest that medical practices, professional associations and medical journals have created task forces to see how it might be useful and to understand what limitations and ethical concerns it may bring.

Dr. Victor Tseng’s practice, Ansible Health, has set up a task force on the issue. The pulmonologist is a medical director of the California-based group and a co-author of the study in which ChatGPT demonstrated that it could probably pass the medical licensing exam.

Tseng said his colleagues started playing around with ChatGPT last year and were intrigued when it accurately diagnosed pretend patients in hypothetical scenarios.

“We were just so impressed and truly flabbergasted by the eloquence and sort of fluidity of its response that we decided that we should actually bring this into our formal evaluation process and start testing it against the benchmark for medical knowledge,” he said.

That benchmark was the three-part test that US med school graduates have to pass to be licensed to practice medicine. It’s generally considered one of the toughest of any profession because it doesn’t ask straightforward questions with answers that can easily found on the internet.

The exam tests basic science and medical knowledge and case management, but it also assesses clinical reasoning, ethics, critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

The study team used 305 publicly available test questions from the June 2022 sample exam. None of the answers or related context was indexed on Google before January 1, 2022, so they would not be a part of the information on which ChatGPT trained. The study authors removed sample questions that had visuals and graphs, and they started a new chat session for each question they asked.

Students often spend hundreds of hours preparing, and medical schools typically give them time away from class just for that purpose. ChatGPT had to do none of that prep work.

The AI performed at or near passing for all the parts of the exam without any specialized training, showing “a high level of concordance and insight in its explanations,” the study says.

Tseng was impressed.

“There’s a lot of red herrings,” he said. “Googling or trying to even intuitively figure out with an open-book approach is very difficult. It might take hours to answer one question that way. But ChatGPT was able to give an accurate answer about 60% of the time with cogent explanations within five seconds.”

Dr. Alex Mechaber, vice president of the US Medical Licensing Examination at the National Board of Medical Examiners, said ChatGPT’s passing results didn’t surprise him.

“The input material is really largely representative of medical knowledge and the type of multiple-choice questions which AI is most likely to be successful with,” he said.

Mechaber said the board is also testing ChatGPT with the exam. The members are especially interested in the answers the technology got wrong, and they want to understand why.

“I think this technology is really exciting,” he said. “We were also pretty aware and vigilant about the risks that large language models bring in terms of the potential for misinformation, and also potentially having harmful stereotypes and bias.”

He believes that there is potential with the technology.

“I think it’s going to get better and better, and we are excited and want to figure out how do we embrace it and use it in the right ways,” he said.

Already, ChatGPT has entered the discussion around research and publishing.

The results of the medical licensing exam study were even written up with the help of ChatGPT. The technology was originally listed as a co-author of the draft, but Tseng says that when the study is published, ChatGPT will not be listed as an author because it would be a distraction.

Last month, the journal Nature created guidelines that said no such program could be credited as an author because “any attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, and AI tools cannot take such responsibility.”

But an article published Thursday in the journal Radiology was written almost entirely by ChatGPT. It was asked whether it could replace a human medical writer, and the program listed many of its possible uses, including writing study reports, creating documents that patients will read and translating medical information into a variety of languages.

Still, it does have some limitations.

“I think it definitely is going to help, but everything in AI needs guardrails,” said Dr. Linda Moy, the editor of Radiology and a professor of radiology at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine.

She said ChatGPT’s article was pretty accurate, but it made up some references.

One of Moy’s other concerns is that the AI could fabricate data. It’s only as good as the information it’s fed, and with so much inaccurate information available online about things like Covid-19 vaccines, it could use that to generate inaccurate results.

Moy’s colleague Artie Shen, a graduating Ph.D. candidate at NYU’s Center for Data Science, is exploring ChatGPT’s potential as a kind of translator for other AI programs for medical imaging analysis. For years, scientists have studied AI programs from startups and larger operations, like Google, that can recognize complex patterns in imaging data. The hope is that these could provide quantitative assessments that could potentially uncover diseases, possibly more effectively than the human eye.

“AI can give you a very accurate diagnosis, but they will never tell you how they reach this diagnosis,” Shen said. He believes that ChatGPT could work with the other programs to capture its rationale and observations.

“If they can talk, it has the potential to enable those systems to convey their knowledge in the same way as an experienced radiologist,” he said.

Tseng said he ultimately thinks ChatGPT can enhance medical practice in much the same way online medical information has both empowered patients and forced doctors to become better communicators, because they now have to provide insight around what patients read online.

ChatGPT won’t replace doctors. Tseng’s group will continue to test it to learn why it creates certain errors and what other ethical parameters need to be put in place before using it for real. But Tseng thinks it could make the medical profession more accessible. For example, a doctor could ask ChatGPT to simplify complicated medical jargon into language that someone with a seventh-grade education could understand.

“AI is here. The doors are open,” Tseng said. “My fundamental hope is, it will actually make me and make us as physicians and providers better.”

Source link

#Paging #ChatGPT #artificial #intelligence #future #medicine #CNN

I’m a parent with an active social media brand: Here’s what you need to check on your child’s social media right now | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Editor’s Note: Sign up for CNN’s Stress, But Less newsletter. Our six-part mindfulness guide will inform and inspire you to reduce stress while learning how to harness it.



CNN
 — 

If you follow me on Twitter or Instagram, you’ll know I wear a lot of hats: romance author, parent of funny tweenagers, part-time teacher, amateur homesteader, grumbling celiac and the wife of a seriously outdoorsy guy.

Because I’m an author with a major publisher in today’s competitive market, I’ve been tasked with stepping up my social media brand: participation, creation and all. The more transparent and likable I am online, the better my books sell. Therefore, to social media I go.

It’s rare to find someone with no social media presence these days, but there’s a marked difference between posting a few pictures for family and friends and actively creating social media content as part of your daily life.

With a whopping 95% of teens polled having access to smartphones (and 98% of teens over 15), according to an August Pew Research Center survey on teens, social media and technology, it doesn’t look like social media platforms are going away anytime soon.

Not only are they key social tools, but they also allow teens to feel more a part of things in their communities. Many teens like being online, according to a November Pew Research Center survey on teen life on social media. Eighty percent of the teens surveyed felt more connected to what is happening in their friends’ lives, while 71% felt social media allows them to showcase their creativity.

So, while posting online is work for me, it’s a way of life for the tweens and teens I see creating and publishing content online. As a parent of two middle schoolers, I know how important social media is to them, and I also know what’s out there. I see the good, the bad and the viral, and I’ve have put together some guidelines, based on what I’ve seen, for my fellow parents to watch for.

Here are eight questions to ask yourself as you check out your children’s social media accounts.

If you don’t, it’s time to start. It’s like when I had to look up the term “situationship,” I saw that ignorance is not bliss in this case. Or really any case when it comes to your children. Both of my children have smartphones, but even if your children don’t have smartphones, if they have any sort of device — phone, tablet, school laptop — it’s likely they have some sort of social media account out there. Every app our children wish to add to their smart devices comes through my husband’s and my phone notifications for approval. Before I approve any apps, I’ll read the reviews, run an internet search and text my mom friends for their experience.

Most tweens and teens use social media for socializing with local friends.

If I’m still uncertain about an app, I’ll hold off on approving it until I can sit down with my children and ask them why they want it. Sometimes just waiting and forcing a short discussion is enough to convince them they no longer want it. In our household, I avoid any apps that run social surveys, allow anonymous feedback or require the individual to use location services.

If you don’t have your family phone plan all hooked together with parental controls, I’d advise setting that up ASAP. Because different devices and apps have different ways to monitor and set up parental controls, it’s impossible to link all the options here. However, a quick search will give you exactly the coverage you are comfortable with, including apps that track your child’s text messages and changing the settings on your child’s phone to lock down at a certain time every night.

The top social media platforms teens use today are YouTube (95% of teens polled), TikTok (67%), Instagram (62%) and Snapchat (59%), according to the Pew Research Center survey on teens and social media tech. Other social media platforms teens use less frequently are Twitter, Reddit, WhatsApp and Facebook. Most notably, Facebook is seeing a significant downturn in teen users. This list isn’t exhaustive, however. I would check out your children’s devices for group chat apps (such as Slack or Discord) and also scroll through their sport or activity apps where group chat capabilities exist.

I’ve seen preteens and teens using their real names, birthdate, home address, pets’ names, locker numbers or their school baseball team. Any of that information could be used to identify your child and location in real life or using a quick Google search. All of that is an absolute “no” in our house.

I also tell my kids not to answer the fun surveys and quizzes that invite children to share their unique information and repost it for others to see. These can be useful tools for predators and people trying to steal your children’s identity.

What I do: I made the choice a long ago to withhold the names of my children and partner. It’s not an exact science, and I know some clever digging could find them. For my husband, it’s for the sake of his privacy and also the protection of his professionalism. Just because he’s married to a romance author doesn’t mean he should have to answer for my online antics, whatever they may be. For my children, I want to avoid anything embarrassing that could be traced back to them during their college application season.

Even if your children keep their social media profiles private (more on that later), their biographical information, screen name and avatar or profile picture are public information.

Do an internet search of your child’s name to see what’s out there and scroll through images to make sure there isn’t anything you wouldn’t want to be made public. In our household, I’ve asked my children to use generic items or illustrated avatars in their social media bios.

What I do: Parents who do have active social media accounts may want to do a search of their own names. When my first book was published in 2019, I did a search of my name and images and found many photos of my children that came directly from my social media pages. I hadn’t posted pictures of them, but I did use a family photo as my profile photo and those are public record. Once I deleted them, the photos disappeared.

Another “no” in our household is posting videos or photos of our home or bedrooms. Something that feels innocent and innocuous to your middle schooler may not feel that way to an adult seeking out inappropriate content.

I learned this from one of my children’s Pinterest accounts. My kid loves to create themed videos using her own photos and stock pictures, and she’s gained over 500 followers in a short period of time. She has completely followed our rules and I know, because I check and follow her myself — but it hasn’t stopped the influx of adult men following her content.

What we do: Over the holidays, I sat with her and went through each follower one by one and blocked anyone we decided was there for the wrong reasons. In the end, we blocked close to 30 adult men on her account. (I also know that some predators cleverly disguise themselves as children or teens, and we may not catch them all, but this is still a worthy exercise.)

We also talk to our children about how to protect themselves. They wouldn’t want those strangers standing in their bedroom; therefore, they don’t want to post videos of their bedroom or bathroom or classroom for strangers to view.

This is a tricky one for lots of reasons. For content creators to build their following, they need to remain public on social media. If your child is an entrepreneur or artist hoping to grab attention, locking down their account will prevent that from happening.

That said, a way around this is to have two accounts. First, a private one, locked down and only used for family and close friends, and second, a public one that lacks identifiers but showcases whatever branding the child is hoping to grow. I’ve come across some well-managed public accounts for children who have giant followings and noticed they are usually run by parents, who state that right in the profile. I like this. If your children want public profiles because they are hoping to catch the attention of a talent scout, having the accounts monitored by a responsible adult who has their best interest in mind is a healthy compromise.

This is the exception, however. Most tweens and teens today use their social media for socializing with local friends. The benefit of keeping their account as private (or as private as can be) is threefold. It allows them to screen who follows their content, thus preventing our Pinterest fiasco. It prevents strangers from accessing their content and making it viral without their permission. And it protects them from unsolicited contact with strangers.

Not all social media platforms have the option to make your account “private.” For example, YouTube has parental controls that can be adjusted at any time. TikTok and Instagram can be made private (which means users must approve followers) by making the change in the account settings. Once the account is private, a little padlock will show next to the username.

Snapchat allows users to approve followers on a case-by-case basis as well as turn off features that disclose a user’s location. Notably, Snapchat also informs users when another user takes a screenshot of their story, which is a feature other social media platforms don’t have yet.

Most group chat apps don’t have the ability to go private so much as they ask users to approve of follower requests. Take time to discuss with your children who they allow to follow them and what personal information they allow those followers to know. It’s also a great time to teach them the art of “blocking” those individuals who are unsafe or unkind.

My suggestion is to log in, scroll around and even ask your children to teach you about the platforms they use. Then, when they roll their eyes at you, go ahead and tell them about your first Hotmail email address and the way you picked the perfect emo playlist on your Myspace page … and when they’re bent over laughing, sneak a peek at their follower list. Trust me, it’ll be worth it.

Source link

#parent #active #social #media #brand #Heres #check #childs #social #media #CNN

Many women underestimate breast density as a risk factor for breast cancer, study shows | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,



CNN
 — 

Dense breast tissue has been associated with up to a four times higher risk of breast cancer. However, a new study suggests few women view breast density as a significant risk factor.

The study, published in JAMA Network Open, surveyed 1,858 women ages 40 to 76 years from 2019 to 2020 who reported having recently undergone mammography, had no history of breast cancer and had heard of breast density.

Women were asked to compare the risk of breast density to five other breast cancer risk factors: having a first-degree relative with breast cancer, being overweight or obese, drinking more than one alcoholic beverage per day, never having children and having a prior breast biopsy.

“When compared to other known and perhaps more well-known breast cancer risks, women did not perceive breast density as significant of a risk,” said Laura Beidler, an author of the study and researcher at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

For example, the authors report that dense breast tissue is associated with a 1.2 to four times higher risk of breast cancer compared with a two times higher risk associated with having a first-degree relative with breast cancer – but 93% of women said breast density was a lesser risk.

Dense breasts tissue refers to breasts that are composed of more glandular and fibrous tissue than fatty tissue. It is a normal and common finding present in about half of women undergoing mammograms.

The researchers also interviewed 61 participants who reported being notified of their breast density and asked what they thought contributes to breast cancer and how they could reduce their risk. While most women correctly noted that breast density could mask tumors on mammograms, few women felt that breast density could be a risk factor for breast cancer.

Roughly one-third of women thought there was nothing they could do to reduce their breast cancer risk, although there are several ways to reduce risk, including maintaining a healthy, active lifestyle and minimizing alcohol consumption.

Breast density changes over a woman’s lifetime, and is generally higher in women who are younger, have a lower body weight, are pregnant or breastfeeding, or are taking hormone replacement therapy.

The level of breast cancer risk increases with the degree of breast density; however, experts aren’t certain why this is true.

“One hypothesis has been that women who have more dense breast tissue also have higher, greater levels of estrogen, circulating estrogen, which contributes to both the breast density and to the risk of developing breast cancer,” said Dr. Harold Burstein, a breast oncologist at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute who was not involved in the study. “Another hypothesis is that there’s something about the tissue itself, making it more dense, that somehow predisposes to the development of breast cancer. We don’t really know which one explains the observation.”

Thirty-eight states currently mandate that women receive written notification about their breast density and its potential breast cancer risk following mammography; however, studies have shown that many women find this information confusing.

“Even though women are notified usually in writing when they get a report after a mammogram that says, ‘You have increased breast density,’ it’s kind of just tucked in there at the bottom of the report. I’m not sure that anyone is explaining to them, certainly in person or verbally, what that means,” said Dr. Ruth Oratz, a breast oncologist at NYU Langone’s Perlmutter Cancer Center who was not involved in the study.

“I think what we’ve learned from this study is that we have to do a better job of educating not only the general public of women, but the general public of health care providers who are doing the primary care, who are ordering those screening mammograms,” she added.

Current screening guidelines recommend women of average risk of breast cancer undergo breast cancer screening every one to two years between ages 50 to 74 with the option of beginning at age 40.

Because women with dense breast tissue are considered to have higher than average cancer risks, the authors of the study suggest women with high breast density may benefit from supplemental screening like breast MRI or breast ultrasound, which may detect cancers that are missed on mammograms. Currently, coverage of supplemental screening after the initial mammogram varies, depending on the state and insurance policy.

The authors warn that “supplemental screening not only can lead to increased rates of cancer detection but also may result in more false-positive results and recall appointments.” They say clinicians should use risk assessment tools when discussing tradeoffs associated with supplemental screening.

“Usually, it’s a discussion between the patient, the clinical team, and the radiologist. And it’ll be affected by prior history, by whether there’s anything else of concern on the mammogram, by the patient’s family history. So those are the kinds of things we discuss frequently with patients who are in such situations,” Burstein said.

Breast cancer screening recommendations differ between medical organizations, and experts say women at higher risk due to breast density should discuss with their doctor what screening method and frequency are most appropriate.

“I think it’s really, really important that everyone understands – and this is the doctors, the nurses, the women themselves – that screening is not a one size fits all recommendation. We cannot just make one general recommendation to the entire population because individual women have different levels of risks of developing breast cancer,” Oratz said.

For the nearly one-third of women with dense breast tissue that reported there was nothing they could do to prevent breast cancer, experts say there are some steps you can take to reduce your risk.

“Maintaining an active, healthy lifestyle and minimizing alcohol consumption address several modifiable factors. Breastfeeding can decrease the risk. On the other hand, use of hormone replacement therapy increases breast cancer risk,” said Dr. Puneet Singh, a breast surgical oncologist at the MD Anderson Cancer Center who was not involved in the study.

The researchers add that there are approved medications, such as tamoxifen, that can be given for those at significantly increased risk that may reduce the chances of breast cancer by about half.

Finally, breast cancer doctors say that in addition to appropriate screening, knowing your risk factors and advocating for yourself can be powerful tools in preventing and detecting breast cancer.

“At any age, if any woman feels uncomfortable about something that’s going on in her breast, if she has discomfort, notices a change in the breast, bring that to the attention of your doctor and make sure it gets evaluated and don’t let somebody just brush you off,” Oratz said.

Source link

#women #underestimate #breast #density #risk #factor #breast #cancer #study #shows #CNN