Background.: Standard treatments for breast cancer can impair fertility. It is unknown how many U.S. survivors are at risk for infertility. We estimated the population at risk for infertility secondary to treatment among reproductive-aged breast cancer survivors. Methods.: We combined data from three sources: the National Program of Cancer Registries (NPCR) and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry data on incident breast cancers diagnosed in women aged 15–44 years between 2004 and 2006; treatment data from NPCR's 2004 Breast and Prostate Cancer Data Quality and Patterns of Care (PoC) study; and data on women's intentions to have children from the 2006–2010 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). Results.: In the cancer registry data, an average of 20,308 women with breast cancer aged <45 years were diagnosed annually. Based on estimates from PoC data, almost all of these survivors (97%, 19,416 women) were hormone receptor positive or received chemotherapy and would be at risk for infertility. These women need information about the impact of treatments on fertility. Estimates based on NSFG data suggest approximately half of these survivors (9,569 women) might want children and could benefit from fertility counseling and fertility preservation. Conclusion.: Nearly all young breast cancer survivors in the U.S. are at risk for infertility. Physicians should discuss the potential impact of treatment on fertility. A smaller but sizeable number of at-risk survivors may be interested in having children. Given the magnitude of potential infertility and its quality-of-life implications, these survivors should have access to and potential coverage for fertility services.

Electronic vapor products (EVPs), including e-cigarettes, can be used to aerosolize many substances. Examination of substances used in EVPs by US adults has been limited; we assessed past-year use of EVPs to deliver various substances. Data came from the 2017 SummerStyles Survey, a web-based survey of US adults (N = 4107). Ever EVP users were asked if they had used nicotine, marijuana, flavors or "something else" in an EVP during the past year. Weighted estimates for any, exclusive, and combined EVP substance use were calculated among ever (n = 586) and current (past 30-day; n = 121) EVP users. Past-year use of nicotine, flavors, and marijuana in EVPs was 30.7%, 23.6%, and 12.5% among ever EVP users, respectively; and 72.3%, 54.6%, and 17.8% among current EVP users. Among ever EVP users, the most commonly used substances were nicotine only (29.6%), nicotine plus flavors (27.2%), flavors only (16.4%), and marijuana only (14.9%). Among current EVP users, the most common substances used were nicotine plus flavors (39.1%), nicotine only (29.6%), and flavors only (11.2%). Among ever users, males and 18-29 year olds were more likely to report use of flavors than females and respondents ≥30 years. Approximately 7 in 10 current EVP users reported nicotine use, about 1 in 2 used flavors, and nearly 1 in 6 used marijuana. These findings suggest that EVPs are used to consume a variety of substances and could guide efforts to address tobacco and non-tobacco substance use.

In 2011, the Division of Cancer Prevention and Control (DCPC), at the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), released a three-year funding opportunity announcement (FOA) for a competitive, non-research cooperative agreement. The agreement enhanced the capacities of state health departments to promote the application of best practices for evidence-based breast cancer genomics through education, surveillance, and policy activities. The FOA required that applicants focus on activities related to hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC). The DCPC funded three states: Georgia, Michigan, and Oregon. Georgia was a first-time recipient of cancer genomics funding, whereas Michigan and Oregon had long standing activities in cancer genomics and had received CDC funding in the past. By the end of the funding period, each state had well-functioning and impactful state-based programs in breast cancer genomics. This article highlights the impact of a few key state activities by using CDC’s Science Impact Framework. There were challenges to implementing public health genomics programs, including the need to develop relevant partnerships, the highly technical nature of the subject matter, a lack of genetic services in certain areas, and the difficulty in funding genetic services. Georgia, Michigan, and Oregon have served as models for others interested in initiating or expanding cancer genomics programs, and they helped to determine what works well for promoting and integrating public health genomics into existing systems.