Breast Cancer Screening Among Women With Intellectual Disability in Denmark.

Trine Allerslev Horsbøl, Susan Ishøy Michelsen, Tina Harmer Lassen, Knud Juel, Janne Bigaard, Christina Engel Hoei-Hansen, Ilse Vejborg, Lau Caspar Thygesen
Author Information
  1. Trine Allerslev Horsbøl: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  2. Susan Ishøy Michelsen: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  3. Tina Harmer Lassen: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  4. Knud Juel: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  5. Janne Bigaard: Prevention and Information, Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  6. Christina Engel Hoei-Hansen: Department of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital-Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  7. Ilse Vejborg: Department of Breast Examinations, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev Gentofte, Copenhagen, Denmark.
  8. Lau Caspar Thygesen: National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Abstract

Importance: breast cancer-specific mortality is increased among women with Intellectual disability (ID), and knowledge about participation in breast cancer screening in this group is needed.
Objective: To examine participation in the Danish national breast cancer screening program among women with ID compared with women without ID.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This dynamic population-based cohort study assessed participation in the Danish national breast cancer screening program initiated in 2007, targeting women aged 50 to 69 years with a screening interval of 2 years. In all, 6357 women with ID born between 1941 and 1967 and eligible for the screening program were identified in national registers. women entered the study between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017. Subsequently, 273 women were excluded due to a history of carcinoma in situ or breast cancer, and 489 due to registration errors in registers. Each woman was individually age-matched with 10 women without ID (reference group). All women were followed up until March 31, 2021, or censoring (due to death, carcinoma in situ, or breast cancer). Data were analyzed from December 1, 2021, to June 31, 2022.
Exposures: Intellectual disability was defined as being registered with an ID diagnosis or a diagnosis most likely leading to ID or residing at an institution for persons with ID.
Main Outcomes and Measures: Participation in breast cancer screening (fully, partly, and never).
Results: A total of 5595 women with ID and 49 423 age-matched women in the reference group were included in the analysis. Of these, 2747 women with ID (49%) and 24 723 in the reference group (50%) were 50 years of age at study entry; for those older than 50 years, the median age was 51 years (IQR, 50-58 years) in both groups. In all, 1425 women with ID (25%) were fully screened according to guidelines for the Danish breast cancer screening program compared with 30 480 women in the reference group (62%). women with ID had nearly 5 times higher odds of never being screened compared with the reference group (odds ratio, 4.90 [95% CI, 4.60-5.22]). In all, 2498 women with ID (45%) and 6573 in the reference group (13%) were never screened. The proportion of never-screened women increased with severity of ID, from 834 of 2287 (36%) among women with mild ID to 173 of 212 (82%) among women with profound ID.
Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that women with ID are markedly less likely to participate in breast cancer screening compared with women without ID. These findings further suggest a need for tailored guidelines and approaches for breast cancer screening in this group of women.

References

  1. JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jun 1;4(6):e2113014 [PMID: 34156453]
  2. Acta Oncol. 2014 Apr;53(4):433-44 [PMID: 24495043]
  3. Disabil Soc. 2020;35(8):1290-1314 [PMID: 34408338]
  4. Prev Med. 2003 Nov;37(5):507-12 [PMID: 14572435]
  5. Lancet. 2014 Mar 8;383(9920):889-95 [PMID: 24332307]
  6. BMC Cancer. 2017 Dec 28;17(1):897 [PMID: 29282034]
  7. Scand J Public Health. 2015 Jun;43(4):333-9 [PMID: 25759376]
  8. BMC Cancer. 2012 Nov 14;12:518 [PMID: 23151053]
  9. Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):91-4 [PMID: 21775362]
  10. Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):30-3 [PMID: 21775347]
  11. Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):8-10 [PMID: 21775344]
  12. BMJ. 2005 Jan 29;330(7485):220 [PMID: 15649904]
  13. Cancer Epidemiol. 2022 Feb;76:102084 [PMID: 34920342]
  14. Res Dev Disabil. 2014 Dec;35(12):3372-8 [PMID: 25194512]
  15. Eur Radiol. 2017 Jul;27(7):2737-2743 [PMID: 27807699]
  16. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 Mar;56(3):221-9 [PMID: 12725876]
  17. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 May 28;11:83 [PMID: 21619668]
  18. Prev Med. 2017 Jul;100:167-172 [PMID: 28455223]
  19. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2013 May;57(5):478-88 [PMID: 23506206]
  20. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83 [PMID: 3558716]
  21. Eur J Med Genet. 2020 Apr;63(4):103783 [PMID: 31605815]
  22. Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jul 12;11:563-591 [PMID: 31372058]
  23. J Intellect Disabil Res. 2017 Mar;61(3):266-278 [PMID: 27624823]
  24. Public Health Rep. 2004 Jul-Aug;119(4):418-26 [PMID: 15219799]
  25. Cancer. 2020 Apr 1;126(7):1522-1529 [PMID: 31904881]
  26. J Med Screen. 2012;19 Suppl 1:14-25 [PMID: 22972807]
  27. Clin Epidemiol. 2013;5:81-8 [PMID: 23526262]
  28. BMC Cancer. 2015 Oct 26;15:798 [PMID: 26502879]
  29. Cancer. 2022 Mar 15;128(6):1267-1274 [PMID: 34787906]
  30. Dan Med Bull. 2001 Aug;48(3):161-3 [PMID: 11556266]
  31. Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):54-7 [PMID: 21775352]
  32. Scand J Public Health. 2011 Jul;39(7 Suppl):22-5 [PMID: 21775345]
  33. Disabil Health J. 2013 Jan;6(1):36-42 [PMID: 23260609]
  34. Dan Med Bull. 2011 Jun;58(6):C4287 [PMID: 21651881]
  35. Br J Cancer. 2020 Sep;123(7):1191-1197 [PMID: 32641863]
  36. Clin Epidemiol. 2020 May 25;12:509-518 [PMID: 32547242]
  37. Intellect Dev Disabil. 2013 Feb;51(1):62-73 [PMID: 23360409]

MeSH Term

Humans
Female
Middle Aged
Breast Neoplasms
Cohort Studies
Intellectual Disability
Early Detection of Cancer
Denmark

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0womenIDbreastcancerscreeninggroupyearsreferenceamongprogramcomparedstudyparticipationDanishnationalwithout50Women31dueneverscreenedBreastincreaseddisabilitycohort2007registers1Decembercarcinomasituage-matched2021Intellectualdiagnosislikelyfullyageguidelinesodds4findingssuggestImportance:cancer-specificmortalityintellectualknowledgeneededObjective:examineDesignSettingParticipants:dynamicpopulation-basedassessedinitiatedtargetingaged69interval26357born19411967eligibleidentifiedenteredJanuary2017Subsequently273excludedhistory489registrationerrorswomanindividually10followedMarchcensoringdeathDataanalyzedJune2022Exposures:definedregisteredleadingresidinginstitutionpersonsMainOutcomesMeasures:ParticipationpartlyResults:total559549 423includedanalysis274749%2472350%entryoldermedian51IQR50-58groups142525%according3048062%nearly5timeshigherratio90[95%CI60-522]249845%657313%proportionnever-screenedseverity834228736%mild17321282%profoundConclusionsRelevance:markedlylessparticipateneedtailoredapproachesCancerScreeningAmongDisabilityDenmark

Similar Articles

Cited By (8)