Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge

Ms. Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

6Years (2021-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
NPNora Pashayan
Nora Pashayan
JBJennifer Brooks
Jennifer Brooks
MDMichel Dorval
Michel Dorval
JCJocelyne Chiquette
Jocelyne Chiquette
Hermann NabiHermann Nabi
Hermann Nabi
Risk-stratified screening for breast cancer (BC) is increasingly considered as a promising approach. However, its implementation is challenging and needs to be acceptable to women. We examined Canadian women’s attitudes towards, comfort level about, and willingness to take part in BC risk-stratified screening. We conducted an online survey in women aged 30 to 69 years in four Canadian provinces. In total, 4293 women completed the questionnaire (response rate of 63%). The majority of women (63.5% to 72.8%) expressed favorable attitudes towards BC risk-stratified screening. Most women reported that they would be comfortable providing personal and genetic information for BC risk assessment (61.5% to 67.4%) and showed a willingness to have their BC risk assessed if offered (74.8%). Most women (85.9%) would also accept an increase in screening frequency if they were at higher risk, but fewer (49.3%) would accept a reduction in screening frequency if they were at lower risk. There were few differences by province; however, outcomes varied by age, education level, marital status, income, perceived risk, history of BC, prior mammography, and history of genetic test for BC (all p ≤ 0.01). Risk-based BC screening using multifactorial risk assessment appears to be acceptable to most women. This suggests that the implementation of this approach is likely to be well-supported by Canadian women.

6 March 2021 in BMC Health Services Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
MSMarc Simard
Marc Simard
MGMyles Gaulin
Myles Gaulin
BCBernard Candas
Bernard Candas
CSCaroline Sirois
Caroline Sirois
Background: Frequent healthcare users place a significant burden on health systems. Factors such as multimorbidity and low socioeconomic status have been associated with high use of ambulatory care services (emergency rooms, general practitioners and specialist physicians). However, the combined effect of these two factors remains poorly understood. Our goal was to determine whether the risk of being a frequent user of ambulatory care is influenced by an interaction between multimorbidity and socioeconomic status, in an entire population covered by a universal health system.Methods: Using a linkage of administrative databases, we conducted a population-based cohort study of all adults in Quebec, Canada. Multimorbidity (defined as the number of different diseases) was assessed over a two-year period from April 1st 2012 to March 31st 2014 and socioeconomic status was estimated using a validated material deprivation index. Frequents users for a particular category of ambulatory services had a number of visits among the highest 5% in the total population during the 2014–15 fiscal year. We used ajusted logistic regressions to model the association between frequent use of health services and multimorbidity, depending on socioeconomic status.Results: Frequent users (5.1% of the population) were responsible for 25.2% of all ambulatory care visits. The lower the socioeconomic status, the higher the burden of chronic diseases, and the more frequent the visits to emergency departments and general practitioners. Socioeconomic status modified the association between multimorbidity and frequent visits to specialist physicians: those with low socioeconomic status visited specialist physicians less often. The difference in adjusted proportions of frequent use between the most deprived and the least deprived individuals varied from 0.1% for those without any chronic disease to 5.1% for those with four or more chronic diseases. No such differences in proportions were observed for frequent visits to an emergency room or frequent visits to a general practitioner.Conclusion: Even in a universal healthcare system, the gap between socioeconomic groups widens as a function of multimorbidity with regard to visits to the specialist physicians. Further studies are needed to better understand the differential use of specialized care by the most deprived individuals.

12 November 2023 in Cancers
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
NPNora Pashayan
Nora Pashayan
CKCornelia D. Kazemali
Cornelia D. Kazemali
JLJulie Lapointe
Julie Lapointe
JSJacques Simard
Jacques Simard
Hermann NabiHermann Nabi
Hermann Nabi
Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the form of a polygenic risk score (PRS) have emerged as a promising factor that could improve the predictive performance of breast cancer (BC) risk prediction tools. This study aims to appraise and critically assess the current evidence on these tools. Studies were identified using Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library up to November 2022 and were included if they described the development and/ or validation of a BC risk prediction model using a PRS for women of the general population and if they reported a measure of predictive performance. We identified 37 articles, of which 29 combined genetic and non-genetic risk factors using seven different risk prediction tools. Most models (55.0%) were developed on populations from European ancestry and performed better than those developed on populations from other ancestry groups. Regardless of the number of SNPs in each PRS, models combining a PRS with genetic and non-genetic risk factors generally had better discriminatory accuracy (AUC from 0.52 to 0.77) than those using a PRS alone (AUC from 0.48 to 0.68). The overall risk of bias was considered low in most studies. BC risk prediction tools combining a PRS with genetic and non-genetic risk factors provided better discriminative accuracy than either used alone. Further studies are needed to cross-compare their clinical utility and readiness for implementation in public health practices.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JLJulie Lapointe
Julie Lapointe
JCJean-Martin Côté
Jean-Martin Côté
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
MDMichel Dorval
Michel Dorval
NPNora Pashayan
Nora Pashayan
Hermann NabiHermann Nabi
Hermann Nabi
Given the controversy over the effectiveness of age-based breast cancer (BC) screening, offering risk-stratified screening to women may be a way to improve patient outcomes with detection of earlier-stage disease. While this approach seems promising, its integration requires the buy-in of many stakeholders. In this cross-sectional study, we surveyed Canadian healthcare professionals about their views and attitudes toward a risk-stratified BC screening approach. An anonymous online questionnaire was disseminated through Canadian healthcare professional associations between November 2020 and May 2021. Information collected included attitudes toward BC screening recommendations based on individual risk, comfort and perceived readiness related to the possible implementation of this approach. Close to 90% of the 593 respondents agreed with increased frequency and earlier initiation of BC screening for women at high risk. However, only 9% agreed with the idea of not offering BC screening to women at very low risk. Respondents indicated that primary care physicians and nurse practitioners should play a leading role in the risk-stratified BC screening approach. This survey identifies health services and policy enhancements that would be needed to support future implementation of a risk-stratified BC screening approach in healthcare systems in Canada and other countries.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SGSimon Gagnet
Simon Gagnet
CDCaroline Diorio
Caroline Diorio
LPLouise Provencher
Louise Provencher
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
JLJulie Lapointe
Julie Lapointe
Hermann NabiHermann Nabi
Hermann Nabi
Gene expression profiling tests such as the Oncotype DX (ODX) 21-gene recurrence score (RS) assay is increasingly used in clinical practice to predict the risk of recurrence and support treatment planning for early-stage breast cancer (BC). However, this test has some disadvantages such as a high cost and a long turnaround time to get results, which may lead to disparities in access. We aim to identify clinicopathological factors associated with ODX RS in women with early-stage BC. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of women identified in the medical database of the Deschênes-Fabia Breast Disease Center of Quebec City University, Canada. Our sample consists of 425 women diagnosed with early-stage BC who have obtained an ODX RS between January 2011 and April 2015. The ODX RS has been categorized into three levels as originally defined: low (0–17), intermediate (18–30), and high (>30). The mean RS was 17.8 (SD = 9.2). Univariate analyses and multinomial logistic regressions were performed to identify factors associated with intermediate and high RS compared with low RS. A total of 237 (55.8%) patients had low RS, 148 (34.8%) had intermediate RS, and 40 (9.4%) had high RS. Women with progesterone receptor (PR)-negative (ORs ranging from 3.51 to 10.34) and histologic grade II (ORs ranging from 3.16 to 23.04) tumors were consistently more likely to have intermediate or high RS than low RS. Similar patterns of associations were observed when the RS was categorised using redefined thresholds from (i.e., from the TAILORx study or dichotomized). This study provides evidence suggesting that histologic grade and PR status are predictive factors for intermediate or high RS in women with early-stage BC. If these results are confirmed in future studies, considering these clinicopathological factors could spare women the need to get such a test before the beginning of a possible adjuvant therapy. This option could be considered in settings where the cost of testing is an issue.

Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SASamuel Alarie
Samuel Alarie
JHJulie Hagan
Julie Hagan
GDGratien Dalpé
Gratien Dalpé
SFSina Faraji
Sina Faraji
CMCynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Cynthia Mbuya-Bienge
Yann JolyYann Joly
Yann Joly
The success of risk-stratified approaches in improving population-based breast cancer screening programs depends in no small part on women’s buy-in. Fear of genetic discrimination (GD) could be a potential barrier to genetic testing uptake as part of risk assessment. Thus, the objective of this study was twofold. First, to evaluate Canadian women’s knowledge of the legislative context governing GD. Second, to assess their concerns about the possible use of breast cancer risk levels by insurance companies or employers. We use a cross-sectional survey of 4293 (age: 30–69) women, conducted in four Canadian provinces (Alberta, British Colombia, Ontario and Québec). Canadian women’s knowledge of the regulatory framework for GD is relatively limited, with some gaps and misconceptions noted. About a third (34.7%) of the participants had a lot of concerns about the use of their health information by employers or insurers; another third had some concerns (31.9%), while 20% had no concerns. There is a need to further educate and inform the Canadian public about GD and the legal protections that exist to prevent it. Enhanced knowledge could facilitate the implementation and uptake of risk prediction informed by genetic factors, such as the risk-stratified approach to breast cancer screening that includes risk levels.