Menopausal hormone therapy use and risk of ovarian cancer by race: the ovarian cancer in women of African ancestry consortium.

BACKGROUND: Most studies examining post-menopausal menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use and ovarian cancer risk have focused on White women and few have included Black women. METHODS: We evaluated MHT use and ovarian cancer risk in Black (n = 800 cases, 1783 controls) and White women (n = 2710 cases, 8556 controls), using data from the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry consortium. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of MHT use with ovarian cancer risk, examining histotype, MHT type and duration of use. RESULTS: Long-term MHT use, ≥10 years, was associated with an increased ovarian cancer risk for White women (OR = 1.38, 95%CI: 1.22-1.57) and the association was consistent for Black women (OR = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.81-1.78, pinteraction = 0.4). For White women, the associations between long-term unopposed estrogen or estrogen plus progesterone use and ovarian cancer risk were similar; the increased risk associated with long-term MHT use was confined to high-grade serous and endometroid tumors. Based on smaller numbers for Black women, the increased ovarian cancer risk associated with long-term MHT use was apparent for unopposed estrogen use and was predominately confined to other epithelial histotypes. CONCLUSION: The association between long-term MHT use and ovarian cancer risk was consistent for Black and White women.

Survival of epithelial ovarian cancer in Black women: a society to cell approach in the African American cancer epidemiology study (AACES).

PURPOSE: The causes for the survival disparity among Black women with epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) are likely multi-factorial. Here we describe the African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES), the largest cohort of Black women with EOC. METHODS: AACES phase 2 (enrolled 2020 onward) is a multi-site, population-based study focused on overall survival (OS) of EOC. Rapid case ascertainment is used in ongoing patient recruitment in eight U.S. states, both northern and southern. Data collection is composed of a survey, biospecimens, and medical record abstraction. Results characterizing the survival experience of the phase 1 study population (enrolled 2010-2015) are presented. RESULTS: Thus far, ~ 650 patients with EOC have been enrolled in the AACES. The five-year OS of AACES participants approximates those of Black women in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry who survive at least 10-month past diagnosis and is worse compared to white women in SEER, 49 vs. 60%, respectively. A high proportion of women in AACES have low levels of household income (45% < $25,000 annually), education (51% ≤ high school education), and insurance coverage (32% uninsured or Medicaid). Those followed annually differ from those without follow-up with higher levels of localized disease (28 vs 24%) and higher levels of optimal debulking status (73 vs 67%). CONCLUSION: AACES is well positioned to evaluate the contribution of social determinants of health to the poor survival of Black women with EOC and advance understanding of the multi-factorial causes of the ovarian cancer survival disparity in Black women.

Racial disparities in epithelial ovarian cancer survival: An examination of contributing factors in the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry consortium.

Black women diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer have poorer survival compared to white women. Factors that contribute to this disparity, aside from socioeconomic status and guideline-adherent treatment, have not yet been clearly identified. We examined data from the Ovarian Cancer in Women of African Ancestry (OCWAA) consortium which harmonized data on 1074 Black women and 3263 white women with ovarian cancer from seven US studies. We selected potential mediators and confounders by examining associations between each variable with race and survival. We then conducted a sequential mediation analysis using an imputation method to estimate total, direct, and indirect effects of race on ovarian cancer survival. Black women had worse survival than white women (HR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.16-1.47) during study follow-up; 67.9% of Black women and 69.8% of white women died. In our final model, mediators of this disparity include college education, nulliparity, smoking status, body mass index, diabetes, diabetes/race interaction, postmenopausal hormone (PMH) therapy duration, PMH duration/race interaction, PMH duration/age interaction, histotype, and stage. These mediators explained 48.8% (SE = 12.1%) of the overall disparity; histotype/stage and PMH duration accounted for the largest fraction. In summary, nearly half of the disparity in ovarian cancer survival between Black and white women in the OCWAA consortium is explained by education, lifestyle factors, diabetes, PMH use, and tumor characteristics. Our findings suggest that several potentially modifiable factors play a role. Further research to uncover additional mediators, incorporate data on social determinants of health, and identify potential avenues of intervention to reduce this disparity is urgently needed.

Racial differences in the association of body mass index and ovarian cancer risk in the OCWAA Consortium.

BACKGROUND: Obesity disproportionately affects African American (AA) women and has been shown to increase ovarian cancer risk, with some suggestions that the association may differ by race. METHODS: We evaluated body mass index (BMI) and invasive epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) risk in a pooled study of case-control and nested case-control studies including AA and White women. We evaluated both young adult and recent BMI (within the last 5 years). Associations were estimated using multi-level and multinomial logistic regression models. RESULTS: The sample included 1078 AA cases, 2582 AA controls, 3240 White cases and 9851 White controls. We observed a higher risk for the non-high-grade serous (NHGS) histotypes for AA women with obesity (ORBMI 30+= 1.62, 95% CI: 1.16, 2.26) and White women with obesity (ORBMI 30+= 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02, 2.42) compared to non-obese. Obesity was associated with higher NHGS risk in White women who never used HT (ORBMI 30+= 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08, 1.82). Higher NHGS ovarian cancer risk was observed for AA women who ever used HT (ORBMI 30+= 2.66, 95% CI: 1.15, 6.13), while in White women, there was an inverse association between recent BMI and risk of EOC and HGS in ever-HT users (EOC ORBMI 30+= 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69, 0.95, HGS ORBMI 30+= 0.73, 95% CI: 0.61, 0.88). CONCLUSION: Obesity contributes to NHGS EOC risk in AA and White women, but risk across racial groups studied differs by HT use and histotype.

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Feasibility, Acceptability, and Preliminary Efficacy of a Web-Based Physical Activity and Sedentary Time Intervention for Survivors of Physical Inactivity-Related Cancers.

BACKGROUND: This pilot study explored the feasibility, acceptability, and usability of a web-based intervention for survivors of physical inactivity-related cancers through a two-arm, 12-week randomized controlled trial. Secondarily, this study tested the change in physical activity (PA) and sedentary time with intervention exposure. METHODS: Prior to randomization to the intervention (n = 45) or behavior "as usual" wait-listed control (n = 40) groups, participants completed baseline surveys and an accelerometer protocol. The intervention focused on increasing PA and decreasing sedentary time through social cognitive theory techniques. Follow-up acceptability/usability surveys (intervention group only) and accelerometers were sent after the intervention period. Information on intervention completion, adverse events, and user statistics were collected to determine feasibility. Median login time and mean acceptability/usability scores were calculated. RESULTS: Participants (mean age = 60 ± 7 years) included female (n = 80, 94%) and male survivors of breast (82%), colon (6%), endometrial (6%), bladder (4%), and kidney (2%) cancer. Seventy-eight (91.7%) participants returned partially or fully complete post-intervention data. There were no reported injuries or safety concerns. Intervention participants logged into the website for a total of 95 min (Q1, Q3 = 11, 204). System usability scores (72 ± 3) indicated above average usability of the website. Changes in time spent active and sedentary were not statistically significantly different between groups (p = 0.45), but within-group changes suggested intervention group participants spent more time active and less time sedentary after the intervention. CONCLUSION: Results of this pilot study suggest its feasibility and acceptability for survivors of several inactivity-related cancers. Additional research to determine long-term efficacy is warranted. This low-cost online-only intervention has the potential to have a very broad reach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Number: NCT03983083. Date registered: June 12th, 2019.