The prestigious panel of medical experts who provoked a nationwide debate when it suggested fewer mammograms is standing by its recommendation that women 50 and older only get the screening every other year.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued an update of its 2009 guidelines on Tuesday, noting that women in their 40s with an average risk of breast cancer should discuss mammography with their clinicians and make individual decisions about whether to have the screening.

When the panel made the panel first made the recommendation, it provoked an outcry from some medical associations and cancer-awareness advocates who feared the advice would lead some women to delay having mammograms and put them at greater risk of death.

“In 2015, contentious discussions about breast cancer screening and prevention continued, with physicians, advocates, lawmakers, and scientists all lending their voices to the debate,” the Task Force said in an editorial on its website.

“Many of these stakeholders focused on the need for women to be able to make more informed health care choices about when to start screening without having to worry about the cost of an insurance copayment,” said the panel of experts, including Stanford Health Policy’s Douglas K. Owens, director of the Center for Health Policy and the Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research.

“The role of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in these discussions has remained unchanged: to empower women with the best scientific data about the benefits and harms associated with breast cancer screening, so they can make an informed decision with their doctor.”

Breast cancer is the second-leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, according to the National Cancer Institute. In 2015, an estimated 232,000 women were diagnosed with the disease and 40,000 women died. It is most frequently diagnosed among women aged 55 to 64 years, and the median age of death from breast cancer is 68 years.

The task force determined that while screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 may reduce the risk for breast cancer death, the number of deaths averted is smaller than that in older women and the number of false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies is larger.

The balance of benefits and harms is likely to improve as women move from their early to late 40s, the task force said.

“In addition to false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies, all women undergoing regular screening mammography are at risk for the diagnosis and treatment of noninvasive and invasive breast cancer that would otherwise not have become a threat to their health, or even apparent, during their lifetime,” the Task Force said. “Beginning mammography screening at a younger age and screening more frequently may increase the risk for over-diagnosis and subsequent overtreatment.”

The independent panel of medical experts from around the nation said that women with a parent, sibling, or child with breast cancer are at higher risk for breast cancer and thus may benefit more than average-risk women from beginning screening in their 40s.

Not everyone is pleased with the recommendations.

Florida Congresswoman and chair of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, issued a statement that suggested the Task Force recommendations could put younger women at risk because their insurance companies may stop paying for their screenings.

“These guidelines indicate that screening for women under 50 is less beneficial in detecting breast cancer than for older women,” said Wasserman Schultz, herself a breast-cancer survivor. “However, because insurance companies often use these guidelines to determine coverage for these critical life-saving screenings, these new recommendations could potentially bar millions of women from getting coverage for screenings they need.”

Judy Salerno, president and CEO of the Susan G. Komen breast cancer charity, said she worries the recommendation could target African-American women in particular.

“A lack of coverage would be most harshly felt in high-risk and underserved populations,” Salerno said. “African-American women, for example, are often diagnosed at younger ages with aggressive forms of breast cancer – and die of breast cancer at rates over 40 percent higher than white women. Screening at younger ages is a critical tool for these women.”

Members of the Task Force, however, emphasized that it was their role to evaluate scientific evidence and not make insurance coverage decisions.

“The USPSTF acknowledges the important role that insurance coverage plays in access to and use of preventive services,” the Task Force said in its editorial. “Coverage decisions are the domain of payers, regulators and legislators. Whatever we may believe about the importance of coverage in shared decision-making about mammography, we cannot exaggerate our interpretation of the science to ensure coverage for a service. This would lead to confusion regarding the state of science versus the politics of coverage.”

Anna Lembke, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at the Stanford University Medical Center, visited SCPKU for two weeks as a faculty fellow in July 2014.  Below are the highlights of a conversation Professor Lembke had with SCPKU in which she shares more details about her research and how SCPKU helped to advance her work in China.

Q: Describe your research and its connection to China

My research focuses on improving the lives of those with addictive disorders. I am especially interested in the intersection between health care systems and culture, and how this intersection impacts addiction treatment. I became interested in studying drug use disorders in China for a number of reasons. First, I spent a year after college living in China (1989-1990) teaching English as part of the Yale China Program. I have followed events in China with keen interest ever since. Second, the total number of drug users in China may be as high as 7 million, with China predicted to have the most heroin users of any country in the world within 5 years. I was curious to find out how China is addressing its burgeoning drug problem, and didn’t just want the “party line.” I wanted to learn about how people addicted to drugs in China are seeking and getting help.

Q: What got you interested in the study of addiction?

When I first began practicing psychiatry, I was not interested in treating addiction. But over time, I came to realize that if I didn’t treat my patients’ drug and alcohol problems, their other mental health issues were unlikely to improve. I also realized that in targeting and treating addiction, I could help patients transform their lives for the better, as well as the lives of those who love them.

Q: Why did you decide to apply for an SCPKU Faculty Fellowship?

SCPKU gave me the financial and logistical support to pursue a research project in China, an opportunity that would not have been possible without their help.

Q: How valuable was SCPKU's team in supporting your fellowship at SCPKU?

The team here at Stanford was helpful with drafting the initial proposal, creating the budget, which was especially challenging, due to my lack of familiarity with what things cost in China, and making contact with the SCPKU staff in Beijing. The team in Beijing was helpful in setting up temporary housing and meals in Beijing, as well as providing maps, information on how to take the subway, and logistical support getting back to the airport.

Q: What were your fellowship objectives and were they met? 

My fellowship objective was to interview treatment-seeking heroin users in China to learn more about the state of addiction treatment in China. My research assistant, Dr. Niushen Zhang, and I planned to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal.

We learned that individuals in China addicted to drugs experience intense social stigma. They are reluctant to utilize government-sponsored treatment, because of fear of loss of anonymity and the ensuing social and economic consequences that follow when they are publicly identified as “addicts,” not to mention the potential loss of their personal freedom. (Addicted persons in China are sent against their will to forced detention centers, or “rehabilitation through labor camps.”) As a result, drug addicted persons in China are deeply mistrusting of government-sponsored treatment, and willing to sacrifice large sums of their own money for anonymous, confidential treatment.

Dr. Niushen Zhang and I recently published our findings in Addiction Science and Clinical Practice, 2015, “A qualitative study of treatment-seeking heroin users in contemporary China.” (To access the article online go to http://www.ascpjournal.org/content/10/1/23)

Q: Describe some highlights of your stay in China/SCPKU. 

The highlight for me was hearing the life stories of heroin-addicted patients at New Hospital in Beijing, and attending an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, conducted entirely in Chinese. The AA members we met told us their participation in this grass-roots 12-step movement literally saved their lives. I also met many wonderful doctors and nurses working with addicted patients in China. Finally, Dr. Zhang and I became good friends. We had hardly known each other before venturing off to do research in China.

Q: List at least THREE words or thoughts that come to mind which best describe your experience at SCPKU. 

Compassion, endurance, overcoming adversity
 

Q: Any future plans in China? 

I’m thinking about taking a group of Stanford residents and/or medical students to China for a total immersion 3-week course to learn about addiction in China.  But not right away.

Jonathan H. Chen was an intern at Stanford Hospital a few years back, admitting patients with unusual medical syndromes or rare diseases.

He wasn’t always sure how to immediately treat these patients.

“I found myself clueless at times,” said Chen. “I thought to myself, I should review the chart of a similar patient who had an experienced clinician care for him so that I can learn from their care plan.”

That triggered Chen’s eureka moment. 

“Why look at just one person’s chart?” he thought. “Why not look at the last thousand charts to see how all doctors take care of their patients in similar cases?”

Doing so, he would have the potential to crowd-source the collective wisdom of physicians all in one central location.

Already having a PhD in computer science and spending a few years as a software developer before medical school, Chen — a wunderkind who started college when he was 13 — knew he had the rare set of skills to marry medicine and technology.

“I thought about how the Amazon product-recommender algorithm works and thought, `Can we do this for medical decision-making?’” said the 34-year-old Chen, a VA Medical Informatics Fellow at Stanford Health Policy.

So instead of, other people who bought this book also liked this book, how about: Other doctors who ordered this CT scan also ordered this medication.

“What if there was that kind of algorithm available to me at the point of care?” he asked. “It doesn’t tell me the right or wrong answer, but I bet this would be really informative and help me make better decisions for my patients.”

The National Institutes of Health agrees. Chen was recently awarded a five-year NIH grant as the principal investigator behind OrderRex, a digital platform that data-mines electronic medical records to learn clinical practice patterns and outcomes to inform concrete medical decisions.

Chen is designing and coding OrderRex with the help of his chief mentor, Russ Altman, a professor of bioengineering, genetics and medicine and director of Stanford’s Biomedical Informatics Training Program. Stanford Health Policy professors of medicine, Mary Goldstein and Steven Asch, round out his core team of grant mentors. Grant collaborators Nigam Shah, Lester Mackey, and Mike Baiocchi are providing additional critical expertise.

“I think OrderRex is a first step towards an entirely new way to provide decision support to physicians,” said Altman. “We will not only have a large database of patients from which we can collect similar patients to create virtual cohorts, but we will also have a database of the decisions that their physicians have made in different clinical situations.”

Altman added: “Each of these capabilities would be transformative — but together they would really change what is possible for a provider sitting with a patient, making decisions about diagnosis and therapy.”

The NIH’s Big Data-to-Knowledge grant will allow Chen to develop and test the platform. Stanford Medicine’s Center for Clinical Informatics provided Chen a year’s worth of Stanford Hospital records, including every medical order for every patient. The more medical data he loads, the more patterns begin to form.

Chen has been using a derivative of Amazon’s algorithm to make his platform scalable with millions of patient records. The broad vision is to eventually integrate this tool with hospital computer networks to assist physicians with their decisions.

“Imagine, technology allowing medical decisions to be informed by the collective experience of thousands of other physicians right at the point-of-care,” Chen said.

There are naysayers who worry such a product will further alienate physicians from their patients and allow doctors to jump to crowd-sourced conclusions about treatment. Chen emphasizes OrderRex would only serve as a tool, which does not substitute for human contact, calculations and conclusions.

“Tools like this are simply to augment the medical decision-making process and hopefully — and I know this is a big goal — improve the quality and efficiencies of health care.”

Altman says the lacking-human-touch argument is imprecise and potentially unethical.

“Of course, providers will always be real people and of course they should be empathetic, listen to the patient, examine the patient, and think about what’s best in the big picture,” he said. “But if there are technological tools that they can use to improve their decision-making, it is probably unethical to replace data-driven decision-making with `touch’ and ‘intuition’ — which often perpetuates the status quo and contributes to variability in practice and variability in outcomes.”

Stanford Medicine is already leading the revolution in precision health and big data to overcome human error and misdiagnosis.

In a 2014 Health Affairs article, Stanford pediatrician Christopher A. Longhurst along with Nigam Shah, MBBS, PhD, assistant professor of biomedical research and assistant director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research, and Robert Harrington, MD, professor and chair of medicine, outlined a vision for drawing medical guidance from day-to-day medical practice in hospitals and doctors’ offices. They called it the Green Button.

The idea is to give doctors access —a green button — to patient data from a vast collection of electronic medical records. They wrote that the instant access to EMRs isn’t a substitute for a clinical trials, but better than resorting to the physician’s own bias-prone memory of one or two previous encounters with similar patients.

Chen is working with those professors, but notes the Green Button concept is to look for “patients like mine” and ask questions about different treatment options that may yield different results. His approach looks for “doctors like me,” and anticipates what the doctor wants before they ask for it.

“The conceit of my approach is that all practicing doctors are already trying to make our best-guess decision to improve our patients' outcomes,” he said. “Rather than trying to directly predict how to change a patient outcome, I look to the records of physician decision-making that already represent a wealth of expertise we are not leveraging in a systematic way.”

Could that wealth of expertise one day make Chen a wealthy man, perhaps the Jeff Bezos of the medical informatics world?

“I wouldn’t complain if I was,” Chen said with a grin. “But if I just wanted to make money, I wouldn’t have gone to medical school,” He gave up a lucrative living as a software developer.

He does recognize, however, that for OrderRex to have a big impact, commercial applications such as licensing the product as an add-on to EMR systems are likely.

“So, having a broad impact that will serve the mission of improving quality and efficiency — that is the ultimate goal.”

Every Halloween there seems to be another animated brushing campaign to save children from their own sweet tooths. For most, the goal is simple: better oral hygiene for kids.

PLAQUEMONSTER is different.

Developed by Jason Wang, director of the Center for Policy, Outcomes and Prevention (CPOP) and a Center for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research (CHP/PCOR) core faculty member, and his team, PLAQUEMONSTER does encourage children to practice good oral hygiene. However, the true purpose of the app is to provide feedback on the user’s engagement that can be used for future forays into mobile health.

Image

Using the game’s team mechanic, the app urges children to encourage their friends to brush and floss. Teammates can release a tooth pet from jail, so kids must hold each other accountable if they want their team to progress.

“The social aspect really does make a difference,” said Zara Abraham, a digital media specialist at CPOP and one of the app’s designers. She found that the app’s first child testers “would always be on the phone making sure that each one was doing their work, checking on their teeth.”

The social aspect is likely to engage children more than the average brushing and flossing campaign, according to Abraham. The app’s storyline also helps set PLAQUEMONSTER apart.

Image

However, PLAQUEMONSTER is more than just a game, more even than a campaign for oral hygiene. Wang’s team hopes to use health literacy games along with demographic and engagement information to develop other mobile health apps. Ultimately, PLAQUEMONSTER is a tool for discovering how people engage with health on a mobile platform and how mobile health apps can improve health care.

Wang unveiled the mHealth app at Stanford Medicine's Population Health Sciences Colloquium last week.

“The spirit that Jason brings to the app is the game mechanics of behavioral economics,” said Manuel Rivera, product manager at CPOP.

Eventually, Wang’s team hopes to develop other mHealth apps that could aid patients with serious conditions, helping them to track their health and engage in their care plan. Wang’s long-term goal is for “people who are of working age and elderly to improve their quality of life and health trajectories” using mobile health.

If all goes well, PLAQUEMONSTER could be a first step toward active engagement between patients and health care using mobile platforms.

This project is supported by an NIH Director's New Innovator Award.

Medical researchers must work together across disciplines to provide better health care to those who need it most, according to panelists at Stanford Medicine’s Annual Population Health Sciences Colloquium.

The symposium, hosted by the Stanford Center for Population Health Sciences, brought together working groups from across the Stanford campus to showcase the latest findings in population health research.

“Population health science at Stanford is likely to make the most important contributions when we cross traditional intellectual expertise disciplines,” said Paul H. Wise, a core faculty member at the Center for Health Policy/Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research (CHP/PCOR).

Many of the scholars at the daylong conference on Tuesday stressed that an interdisciplinary approach to health care is crucial to understanding and aiding underserved populations.

“To deal with life-course questions we need to create-life course observational windows,” said Mark Cullen, chief of the Division of General Medical Disciplines and director of the Stanford Center for Population Health Sciences.

Instead of trying to create an all-encompassing care plan for the human population as a whole, panelists demonstrated that studying the needs of particular groups, or smaller populations, can better serve individuals within populations that may not receive the best care.

Douglas K. Owens, director of CHP/PCOR, said the U.S.  Preventive Services Task Force, of which he is a member, has “often faced a real paucity of data trying to develop prediction guidelines for both the very young and the old.”

The Task Force, a panel of experts that makes recommendations for medical prevention services, is generally able to make guidelines for large populations like adults, but suggestions for specialized groups like children and the elderly are more challenging. Though Stanford researchers like Wise are working to improve care for particular sectors like children, more study is needed.

Several speakers at the conference said the underserved population of poor children could benefit from research targeted toward their population group.

“We don’t really understand the biology of the life-course, why things taking place in gestation and early life actually affect healthy aging and adult onset disease,” said Wise, adding, “We have a very poor understanding of how to translate this understanding into effective interventions for communities in need.”

Panelists agreed that big data can help them understand smaller, poorly served populations, such as young children in impoverished communities. By collecting large amounts of data from the general population, researchers will increase the amount of data available for more specific groups. This allows researchers to study these populations more closely and help create better outcomes.

Abby King, a professor of health research and policy and of medicine, and Jason Wang, director of the Center for Policy, Outcomes and Prevention (CPOP) and a CHP/PCOR core faculty member, believe life-course digital applications can provide individualized care while collecting data on a large-scale.

According to King, a life-course app, or a device to track health and provide care throughout one’s life, would grow with the user and help them through important developmental stages.

Image

Health-care techniques using mobile devices, known as mHealth, could be particularly useful in underserved populations. King notes that even low-income populations have cell phones, so using phones as health-care tools could help decrease the gap between higher- and lower-income populations.

“I think for us one of the major challenges of the century is to really close that health-disparities gap and mHealth can help.”

However, each app must be tailored to the user.

“There’s no reason to believe that an African-American 16-year-old is going to be motivated the same way as a 45-year-old white man,” said Wang. “You need to involve patients in the design of the app.” When the app fits the specific patient’s needs, they are more likely to use it regularly, and knowing the needs of their population helps determine their preferences.

As the world continues to become more connected, the panelists said that reaching across disciplines and incorporating technology may hold the key to effective health care in the 21^st century.

Ian Crozier, MD, is a walking laboratory for Ebola and a living testament to the damaging, long-term consequences of the disease, which are still very poorly understood.

As a volunteer physician with the World Health Organization in Sierra Leone, he worked furiously last fall to save patients in the heat of the Ebola crisis in West Africa. Then on Sept. 9, 2014, he became one of those patients himself and was airlifted to Emory University Hospital in Atlanta, where his vital organs rapidly began shutting down.

During an Oct. 21 appearance at Stanford, Crozier recounted his astonishing recovery, during which he rebounded from a torturous period of being hooked to a ventilator and a kidney dialysis machine, experiencing abnormal heart rhythms, and developing severe encephalopathy that left him delirious and then unconscious for weeks, ultimately suffering several hemorrhagic strokes.

“If I you had told me on day one that I would develop multisystem organ failure and asked me to predict my chances of survival, I would have said my chances were zero,” he told more than 100 faculty, students and staff in a standing-room only talk at the School of Medicine. “They [the Emory caregivers] really changed the game…. I really think they were walking on the moon, but in a different kind of space suit.”

Dr. Ian Crozier, dressed in personal protective equipment, with Ebola-positive Sierra Leonean children. Schools remain closed in Sierra Leone and Liberia, two countries hit hard by the Ebola outbreak.

He was among the sickest of patients to survive the disease and continues to suffer from a variety of disturbing consequences, including eye problems, hearing loss with tinnitus, short-term memory loss, seizures and sleep dysregulation, he said. He wryly cautioned his audience that he was approaching his “hour of narcolepsy” as he started his late- afternoon talk.

Crozier’s talk was sponsored by the Stanford Center for Innovation in Global Health, Stanford Immunology and the Stanford Medical Scientist Training Program.

It coincided with a plethora of recent news reports on the long-term consequences suffered by many Ebola survivors. The epidemic has killed more than 11,300 people and has not reached its end; in just the last few weeks, three new cases were reported.

Read his full story here.