James Haenes’ Post

Published! DBC's Jennie Dale and Annie Slight's latest op-ed has been published in the Montreal Gazette. Quebec's breast screening policies are currently the worst in the country. All women should HAVE an equal chance to find breast cancer early ,no matter where they live. Please read the op ed here. Opinion: Quebec’s breast cancer screening policies are failing women. Early detection can make all the difference, but the province lags behind in adopting crucial practices that could save lives. Author of the article: Jennie Dale and Annie Slight Published Oct 17, 2024 We are in the middle of another Breast Cancer Awareness Month, and while all other provinces are modernizing their breast-screening guidelines based on current science, Quebec lags behind in adopting crucial practices that could save lives. Many Quebec women are suffering when early detection could make all the difference. Quebec is now the only jurisdiction that has not announced plans to lower the breast screening age from 50 to 40 and allow women to self-refer (without a doctor’s requisition) in their 40s. Women are forced to wait until age 50 for routine mammograms. Thirteen per cent of breast cancers occur in women in their 40s, and these cancers tend to be more aggressive: They grow faster and potentially spread faster than cancers in older women. The government’s stalling ignores the evidence that breast cancer incidence in this age group is rising. Research has consistently shown that screening in the 40s could lead to earlier diagnoses, improving survival and reducing the need for invasive treatments like mastectomy and chemotherapy. Quebec’s inaction also disproportionately harms women from marginalized communities. Non-white women in particular face a higher incidence of breast cancer in their 40s and early 50s. Their stage at diagnosis is higher and this negatively affects their survival. As well, for women in Quebec without access to a family doctor, getting a requisition for a mammogram is a challenge. The refusal to allow self-referral in the 40s is not just a public health failure — it’s an equity issue. And it’s not just about saving lives — it’s about saving the system money and reducing pressures. As a result of advances in treatment and new drugs, costs have skyrocketed. According to a 2023 Canadian study, treating a Stage 1 cancer costs an average of $39,000, while a Stage 4 cancer costs nearly 10 times that amount at $370,000. Finding cancer early also reduces the overall burden on the health-care system with less need for surgeons, oncologists, imaging, ER visits, and more. Please continue reading, link below: https://tr.ee/skNJLQbWK1

"When I hear researchers talk about future developments, I truly believe further progress is possible." 🔵 This is Ann's story: part of our cancer patient advocate voices series. 🔗 Learn more about the VOICE Science for Patient Advocates course, run by the BCI and Independent Cancer Patients' Voice: https://lnkd.in/e_2HgQvF 💬 "My name is Ann, and I’m from Belfast in Northern Ireland. I have stage four metastatic breast cancer, which is incurable but treatable, with an average life expectancy of two to five years. I am on both anti-HER2+ targeted therapy and endocrine therapy, and have three-monthly scans to monitor if these treatments are effective. At the moment, I’m living well, and while that’s the case I want to use my time to drive positive change through my patient advocacy work. I work hard and am eager to see improvements made during my lifetime. I’m a member of the Northern Ireland Cancer Research Consumer Forum, which aims to increase personal and public involvement in cancer research in Northern Ireland. Health care is devolved to the Northern Ireland Executive, and unfortunately, we are sometimes overlooked or left behind when improvements are introduced. I wanted to attend the VOICE course to help remedy that and ensure Northern Ireland is represented in discussions at the forefront of cancer research and care. The highlight of the VOICE course was listening to world-leading researchers and feeling a sense of hope and optimism about the progress being made. Great strides have been made in the past years. When I was first diagnosed, there were just two targeted treatments available for my cancer sub-type and I knew treatment options were limited as my disease progressed. But in the four years since my diagnosis, I’ve seen two highly effective treatments approved by NICE and reach the clinic. So, when I hear researchers talk about future developments, I truly believe further progress is possible. It’s also heartening to see how much the researchers care. I could feel their passion, enthusiasm and dedication, they all want to do their absolute best. Much of my advocacy work has been focused on breast cancer, but I want to deepen my understanding of metastatic disease more broadly. I feel lucky because we have some really effective treatments available for metastatic breast cancer and, as a result, we’re living longer. But people with other metastatic cancer types, such as lung, have so little time. Moving forward, I would like to advocate more for those affected by other metastatic cancer types." Queen Mary University of London | Queen Mary Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry | Cancer Research UK City of London Centre | David (Dave) Chuter | #cancerpatient #patientadvocate #breastcancer

📌I am sure all have been pretty heavily bombarded by "pink posts" and "oranges" y(breast cancer awareness) this October and have no doubt that this will only increase in the years to come. 📌Although screening mammography, when used in the right context has undoubtable advantages in earlier detection (& treatment) of breast cancer, it is important not to go overboard with this while discounting other probably more important factors that have led to better survival outcomes in such patients. 📌A major Danish-Norwegian population based cohort study followed the effect of organised mammography screening on breast cancer mortality and surprisingly found that the result does NOT favour the breast cancer screening programme. 📌The study found that fewer and fewer women die from breast cancer in recent years but, surprisingly, the decline is just as large in the age groups that are NOT SCREENED. The decline is therefore due to better treatment and not screening for breast cancer. All breast cancer patients live longer, and they do so because we now have better drugs and more effective chemotherapy, and because we have cancer care pathways, which means the healthcare system reacts faster than it did two decades ago. But it does not appear that fewer women die of breast cancer as a result of mammography screening ALONE. 📌The problem is that with screening, we detect cancers are earlier than would otherwise have been done, and thus move the point of diagnosis forward in time. But even if someone who has been screened lives longer as a patient (DFS), it is not certain that their life as a whole will be longer (OS). It is important to account for this fact, and the new study shows that screening does not lead to women living longer overall. 📌The second important issue that arises from population based screening is OVER-DIAGNOSIS and OVER-TREATMENT. Not all women with mammography detected breast cancer will ultimately die as a result of the cancer. Such a breast cancer diagnosis makes life more difficult (anxiety, depression) and costs a lot of money, but does not ultimately make a difference. 📌The solution? We should get together and begin to investigate whether it would beneficial to do something other than screening and whether this could have a better effect! 📌And finally, whether screening or not, here are 3 undisputable truths of breast lumps : 1. All breasts have lumps. 2. Not all breast lumps are cancer. 3. Not all cancers present as lumps. 📌Use screening widely but WISELY. Screening has no benefit if not followed by appropriate counseling, treatment and regular post treatment follow up. 🙏Your thoughts with reference to the Indian scenario, given the rapid advancements and increased accessibility of the general population to standard protocol based treatment are welcome. #screening #mammography #survival #breastcancer #pinktober https://lnkd.in/d2JMd6nm

New Post: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? – NBC Boston -When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky.... When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky. We caught it with enough time that I had options,” the 43-year-old actor posted on Instagram. “I want the same for any woman who might have to face this one day.” A look at the calculator, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? It's a questionnaire on the National Cancer Institute’s website that is designed for health care providers to use with patients. The tool received a “dramatic increase in visits” since Munn’s post, according to an NCI spokesperson. First developed in 1989, it was originally based on data from only white women. Updates have made it more accurate for Black, Hispanic and Asian and Pacific Islander women. It doesn't take everything into account and can't actually predict whether any one person will get breast cancer. It asks about age, age at first menstrual period, age when the woman’s first child was born or if the woman has not given birth, family history of breast cancer, past breast biopsies, results of past biopsies, race and ethnicity. The result is a lifetime risk and a five-year risk based on factors that have been tied to a higher risk of breast cancer. For comparison, it also gives an average risk for U.S. women of the same age, race and ethnicity. Dr. Elizabeth Comen, who treats breast cancer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, said women should do the assessment with their doctors, not by themselves. “It’s very important to talk to your doctor about doing that together, and then making decisions about what imaging techniques are appropriate” based on the results, Comen said. Munn's high score prompted additional imaging tests that aren't recommended for women of average risk. Olivia Munn is coming forward with a devastating health update. Should everyone use the tool? It's not the best risk calculator for some women. If you have a certain gene mutation or a previous history of breast cancer, it's not for you. It also doesn't take into account dense breast tissue, which can make cancer harder to spot. The National Cancer Institute says the tool may underestimate risk in Black women with previous biopsies and Hispanic women born outside the U.S. "The model needs further

Before Breast Cancer Awareness Month comes to an end, I'd encourage you to take a look at Wisconsin Cancer Collaborative 's 2022 Report from the Reducing Breast Cancer Disparities Project. Key Findings from the Report: 1. Significant breast cancer disparities persist between Black and White cisgender women in Wisconsin. 2. The breast cancer mortality rate for White women has decreased since 1995; however, the mortality rate for Black women has held steady during the same period. 3. Black women are disproportionately diagnosed with breast cancer at later stages. 4. Black women are disproportionately diagnosed with breast cancer at earlier ages. 5. This report cannot speak to the causes of these disparities; more in-depth research into health disparities and social determinants of health in southern and southeastern Wisconsin will help to reveal paths forward. Granted the report does not speak to the why, we can look at the wealth gap as a starting point. - Wisconsin has the 2nd largest wealth gap between white and black residents in the country. We know that access to health care and access to wealth have direct correlation and situational causation that helps widen health equity disparities. As a black woman in her early 30's I encourage every woman to advocate for herself while seeking medical attention. Take a friend or a family member with you, get a second or third opinion if needed and lastly research every medication that you are offered. Yesterday I attended the Madison 365 Leadership Conference where Tamara Thompson left us with a gem that I'll be taking with me to every doctor's appointment. She said, "Using BRAND, ask your medical professional's the following: B - Benefit, what is the benefit of this treatment, R - What is the Risk? , A - What are the Alternatives, N - What happens if I do nothing, D - now you can make an informed decision." https://lnkd.in/g4paZn3w

New Post: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? – NBC Boston -When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky.... When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky. We caught it with enough time that I had options,” the 43-year-old actor posted on Instagram. “I want the same for any woman who might have to face this one day.” A look at the calculator, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? It's a questionnaire on the National Cancer Institute’s website that is designed for health care providers to use with patients. The tool received a “dramatic increase in visits” since Munn’s post, according to an NCI spokesperson. First developed in 1989, it was originally based on data from only white women. Updates have made it more accurate for Black, Hispanic and Asian and Pacific Islander women. It doesn't take everything into account and can't actually predict whether any one person will get breast cancer. It asks about age, age at first menstrual period, age when the woman’s first child was born or if the woman has not given birth, family history of breast cancer, past breast biopsies, results of past biopsies, race and ethnicity. The result is a lifetime risk and a five-year risk based on factors that have been tied to a higher risk of breast cancer. For comparison, it also gives an average risk for U.S. women of the same age, race and ethnicity. Dr. Elizabeth Comen, who treats breast cancer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, said women should do the assessment with their doctors, not by themselves. “It’s very important to talk to your doctor about doing that together, and then making decisions about what imaging techniques are appropriate” based on the results, Comen said. Munn's high score prompted additional imaging tests that aren't recommended for women of average risk. Olivia Munn is coming forward with a devastating health update. Should everyone use the tool? It's not the best risk calculator for some women. If you have a certain gene mutation or a previous history of breast cancer, it's not for you. It also doesn't take into account dense breast tissue, which can make cancer harder to spot. The National Cancer Institute says the tool may underestimate risk in Black women with previous biopsies and Hispanic women born outside the U.S. "The model needs further

New Post: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? – NBC Boston -When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky.... When Olivia Munn revealed this week that she was diagnosed with breast cancer and had a double mastectomy, she urged people to ask their doctors to figure out their score on a breast cancer risk calculator. Munn said her score prompted further tests and the discovery of an aggressive form of the disease. “I’m lucky. We caught it with enough time that I had options,” the 43-year-old actor posted on Instagram. “I want the same for any woman who might have to face this one day.” A look at the calculator, the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool: What is the Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Tool? It's a questionnaire on the National Cancer Institute’s website that is designed for health care providers to use with patients. The tool received a “dramatic increase in visits” since Munn’s post, according to an NCI spokesperson. First developed in 1989, it was originally based on data from only white women. Updates have made it more accurate for Black, Hispanic and Asian and Pacific Islander women. It doesn't take everything into account and can't actually predict whether any one person will get breast cancer. It asks about age, age at first menstrual period, age when the woman’s first child was born or if the woman has not given birth, family history of breast cancer, past breast biopsies, results of past biopsies, race and ethnicity. The result is a lifetime risk and a five-year risk based on factors that have been tied to a higher risk of breast cancer. For comparison, it also gives an average risk for U.S. women of the same age, race and ethnicity. Dr. Elizabeth Comen, who treats breast cancer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, said women should do the assessment with their doctors, not by themselves. “It’s very important to talk to your doctor about doing that together, and then making decisions about what imaging techniques are appropriate” based on the results, Comen said. Munn's high score prompted additional imaging tests that aren't recommended for women of average risk. Olivia Munn is coming forward with a devastating health update. Should everyone use the tool? It's not the best risk calculator for some women. If you have a certain gene mutation or a previous history of breast cancer, it's not for you. It also doesn't take into account dense breast tissue, which can make cancer harder to spot. The National Cancer Institute says the tool may underestimate risk in Black women with previous biopsies and Hispanic women born outside the U.S. "The model needs further

Here’s recent evidence that should influence the upcoming breast screening guidelines, but will the Task Force pay attention to current evidence and expert input? We will find out very soon. 1. Breast cancer in women under the age of 50 in Canada has increased significantly. Cancer in women in their 20s has increased by 45.5%, in the 30s by 12.5%, and in the 40s by 9.1% in the past 34 years. A similar increase in the USA was one reason the US lowered the screening age from 50 to 40 https://lnkd.in/gBWXQxVr 2. Provinces that do not include women in the 40s in their screening programs have significantly more stages 2, 3, and 4 cases of breast cancer. Since 2011 when the Task Force guidelines were changed to NOT include the women in the 40s, there has been a 10.3% increase in stage 4 breast cancer. https://lnkd.in/gFUqmXC5 3. Women living in provinces/territories that included women in the 40s in screening programs had reduced breast cancer mortality and higher net survival at 10 years compared to those living in provinces where screening started at age 50. https://lnkd.in/gt4W3d_B 4. Women of race/ethnicity other than White have earlier peak age at diagnosis, higher proportions of breast cancer diagnosed under age 50, and a peak age of death younger than White women. (submitted manuscript to CMAJ, collaboration with Stats Canada) 5. Modern studies and observational trials demonstrate that screening mammography is associated with a 40-60% reduction in breast cancer mortality, compared with the 27% reduction seen in the 40–60-year-old randomized trials. 6. The treatment costs of breast cancer have risen exponentially due to the rapidly evolving breast cancer treatment. https://lnkd.in/gsxhGTG2 7. Screening a cohort of women annually for breast cancer starting at age 40 to 74 saves the Canadian health care system $459.6M over these women’s lifetime with 3499 breast cancer deaths averted and 52367 life years gained. https://lnkd.in/gZiJa5D2 8. The provinces/territories have changed their policies and are not following the Task Force guidelines. Currently screening at 40 are: BC, NS, PEI, NL, and YT. AB and NWT start at age 45. NB is expected to begin 40s very soon, SK in 2025 and ON in Fall 2024. Quebec is reviewing the evidence. Manitoba has stated it would wait for the Task Force guideline.

Today is Metastatic Breast Cancer (MBC) Awareness Day. We celebrate those living and thriving with MBC; we honour, remember and mourn those we’ve lost in the community; and we ask anyone reading this to sign our petition in response to the calls from the MBC community to “Make Me Count.” At times I’m truly in awe of the progress that’s been made in MBC outcomes since we held our Young + Metastatic forum just less than a decade ago. Those early MBC collaborators who took the stage that day really shaped the direction of Rethink’s MBC program. They are all gone now. All died so young. They felt the impact of the projects we co-created with them at the time. I wish they knew just how much they dramatically changed the trajectory of our efforts and the direction of our organization. Our work in the MBC space is, as always, a “both and” approach. We celebrate the progress, and we amplify the needs to create urgency because even with a decade of progress, there is still so much to do for the MBC community. While we know a few who are off treatment and currently no evidence of disease (NED), most we know in the MBC community will be in treatment for the rest of their lives, living scan to scan with hope, uncertainty and boat loads of side-effects. And some women in the community are living and thriving with MBC for 5, 10, 15 years with long stretches of stability thanks to new and better treatments. But others with the exact same diagnosis and treatment protocols have MBC that becomes treatment resistant much quicker.  We continue to experience devastating loss.   There is so much more about MBC that we need to know.     There is still a massive gap in our cancer data when it comes to accurately capturing the metastatic experience. Right now, we don’t know how many active MBC cases there are in Canada. Estimates can be made but we don’t know who these women are? How many are under the age of 50? What is their experience? Or how long they live? What factors impact their outcomes? Without this data, we cannot truly understand MBC. We don’t know precisely what solutions to offer or where to push for change to improve outcomes and improve survival.     I am frustrated that the needle hasn’t moved further on improved reporting on metastatic recurrence data, which we’ve made a key priority for a few years. And I’m feeling more hopeful than ever. All signs point to there being increasing political will to improve cancer data.     So, today is Metastatic Breast Cancer Awareness Day. People with MBC around the world, in Canada, and at your local cancer centre are asking you to, “Make me count.” Today, sign our petition to tell them, “You do.” Sign our petition at https://lnkd.in/ge73J4qB #breastcancer #metastaticbreastcancer #advancedbreastcancer #datascience #makemecount

In a world-first study published today in the leading international journal Nature Medicine looking at the long-term outcomes of precision medicine for children with cancer, we're delighted to share with you the results that confirm: ZERO is changing the model of care for children with cancer 💚 Since 2017, ZERO, which is led in partnership by Children’s Cancer Institute and the Kids Cancer Centre at Sydney Children’s Hospital, Randwick, has been providing in-depth genomic analysis and comprehensive drug testing for children with high-risk cancers across Australia, with the aim of identifying new treatment options which are recommended back to the child’s treating clinician. We have shown that this precision-guided therapy provided by ZERO leads to significantly improved outcomes for children with high-risk cancers and is superior to standard or non-precision guided therapy, both in terms of clinical response and survival. Of the 384 children on the study, 55% of children who received their personalised treatment achieved complete or partial remission, or had their disease stabilised for at least 6 months. In addition, children who received a ZERO-recommended treatment did significantly better than those who did not. Their 2-year progression-free survival was more than double that of children who received standard therapy (26% vs 12%), and five times higher than that of children who received an unguided treatment (a novel agent not chosen on the basis of molecular findings). Considering these were children with highly aggressive cancers which, in many cases, had already failed to respond to standard therapy, these results are extraordinary and show that ZERO is truly life-saving for some children. Furthermore, children who received their recommended therapy early on in their treatment journey did significantly better than those who received it after their disease had progressed, suggesting that the sooner a personalised treatment strategy can be implemented, the better the chance of preventing relapse and death. ZERO has now enrolled over 1600 children across Australia and at the end of last year, the Program became available to all Australians aged 0-18 years who are diagnosed with cancer. This is the first time that precision medicine has been made available to every child diagnosed with cancer, not just in Australia, but in any country in the world, and we couldn't have done it without every one of our incredible supporters. You are truly changing the model of care for children with cancer. Thank you. Read the full story here: https://lnkd.in/gXCVdkVn