A hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal state in head and neck cancer: A biomarker for survival with differential prognosis by self-reported race.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is the 6th leading cause of cancer-related mortality, with racial disparities amplifying the challenges in treatment. Although the relationship between hybrid epithelial/mesenchymal (E/M) states and tumor progression is of interest, no studies have characterized the clinical relevance of hybrid E/M states in head and neck cancer outcomes among self-reported racial cohorts. METHODS: Given the overlap in gene expression between hybrid E/M malignant cells and cancer-associated fibroblasts, we utilized deconvolution of bulk RNA sequencing data from oral cavity and laryngeal squamous cell carcinoma tumors from The Cancer Genome Atlas. We utilized our previously collected single-cell profiles to generate inferred malignant profiles and then scored these for hybrid E/M. We then conducted a survival analysis on overall and disease-free survival among self-reported Black and White Americans. FINDINGS: The hybrid E/M state was differentially associated with head and neck cancer survival by self-reported race and ethnicity, with a stronger association in non-Hispanic Black patients. Black patients with a high hybrid E/M score had a higher risk of death or recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.18 [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.06, 8.49]) than White patients with a high hybrid E/M score (HR: 1.58 [95% CI: 1.11, 2.26]). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest a complex interplay of social structure, racism, and genetic diversity. We implore researchers to consider the social and biological context contributing to disparities. FUNDING: A.L.M. received support from the National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities (K01MD013897 [principal investigator (PI), A.L.M.]). S.V.P. received support from the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research (R01DE032865 [PI, S.V.P.] and R01DE032371 [PI, S.V.P.]).

Trends in ototoxicity monitoring among cisplatin-treated patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: This study aims to characterize patterns in ototoxicity monitoring and identify potential barriers to audiologic follow-up. METHODS: We performed a single-institution retrospective cohort study on adult (≥ 18 years old) cancer patients treated with cisplatin from January 2014 to September 2021. Our primary outcomes were rates of baseline and post-treatment audiograms at the following time points: 3, 6, 12, and greater than 12 months. Time-to-event analyses were performed to describe additional insights to ototoxicity monitoring patterns. RESULTS: Nine hundred fifty-five patients with cancer were included for analysis. The most common primary cancer sites were head and neck (64%), followed by cervical (24%). Three hundred seventy-three patients (39%) underwent baseline audiometric assessment, 38 patients (4%) received audiologic evaluation during chemotherapy, and 346 patients (36%) obtained at least one post-treatment audiogram. Audiologic follow-up was greatest within 3 months of completing chemotherapy (26%), but this tapered dramatically to less than 10% at every other post-treatment time point. Patients with head and neck cancer achieved higher rates of audiologic follow-up at every time point than patients with non-head and neck cancer except for during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Ototoxicity monitoring is an inconsistent practice, particularly during chemotherapy and for long-term surveillance of hearing loss. Patients with non-head and neck cancer may be at increased risk for loss of audiologic follow-up. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Cisplatin ototoxicity is a common occurrence that can be effectively managed with auditory rehabilitation. Therefore, referrals to audiology and counseling on treatment-related ototoxicity are recommended throughout chemotherapy and cancer survivorship.

Neighborhood Disadvantage and Breast Cancer-Specific Survival in the US.

Importance: Despite improvements in breast cancer screening, treatment, and survival, disparate breast cancer-specific survival outcomes persist, particularly in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Most of these disparities are attributed to disparities in individual, tumor, and treatment characteristics. However, a critical knowledge gap exists as to whether disparities in breast cancer-specific survival remain after accounting for individual, tumor, and treatment characteristics. Objective: To evaluate if neighborhood disadvantage is associated with shorter breast cancer-specific survival after controlling for individual, tumor, and treatment characteristics in a national population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This national retrospective cohort study included patients with breast cancer diagnosed from 2013 to 2018 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 17 Census tract-level socioeconomic status and rurality database of the National Cancer Institute. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to December 2023. Exposures: Neighborhood disadvantage measured by Yost index quintiles. Main Outcomes and Measures: Breast cancer-specific survival was evaluated using a competing risks cause-specific hazard model controlling for age, race, ethnicity, rurality, stage, subtype, insurance, and receipt of treatment. Results: A total of 350 824 patients with breast cancer were included; 41 519 (11.8%) were Hispanic, 39 631 (11.3%) were non-Hispanic Black, and 234 698 (66.9%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 87 635 patients (25.0%) lived in the most advantaged neighborhoods (group 5) and 52 439 (14.9%) lived in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods (group 1). A larger number of non-Hispanic White patients (66 529 patients [76.2%]) lived in advantaged neighborhoods, while disadvantaged neighborhoods had the highest proportion of non-Hispanic Black (16 141 patients [30.9%]) and Hispanic patients (10 168 patients [19.5%]). Breast cancer-specific survival analysis found the most disadvantaged neighborhoods (group 1) had the highest risk of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.36-1.50; P < .001) compared with the most advantaged neighborhoods. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national cohort study of patients with breast cancer, neighborhood disadvantage was independently associated with shorter breast cancer-specific survival even after controlling for individual-level factors, tumor characteristics, and treatment. This suggests potential unaccounted-for mechanisms, including both nonbiologic factors and biologic factors.

Risk and predictors of penile cancer in US Veterans with HIV.

OBJECTIVES: People with HIV (PWH) may have an increased burden of penile cancer. We aimed to evaluate the risk of penile cancer in PWH compared with that of the general population. DESIGN: We conducted a nationwide retrospective matched cohort study of penile cancer incidence among veterans with HIV (VWH) compared with veterans without HIV. METHODS: We compared penile cancer incidence rates in 44 173 VWH to those of veterans without HIV ( N  = 159 443; 4 : 1 matched in age). We used Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations with HIV infection and for penile cancer risk factors. RESULTS: HIV positivity was associated with an increased risk of penile cancer, with adjusted hazard ratios of 2.63 (95% CI 1.64-4.23) when adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, baseline BMI, smoking and alcohol use, economic means test, and history of condyloma. The risk increased to hazard ratio = 4.25 (95% CI 2.75-6.57) when adjusting for all factors except history of condyloma. Risk factors for penile cancer in VWH included lower nadir CD4 + count, less than 50% of follow-up time with undetectable HIV viral load, and history of condyloma. CONCLUSION: VWH - particularly those with low CD4 + counts, detectable HIV viral loads, or history of condyloma - are at increased risk of penile cancer, suggesting the penile cancer prevention activities are needed in this population.

Neighborhood-Level Disadvantage and Delayed Adjuvant Therapy in Head and Neck Cancer.

Importance: For patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC), initiation of postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) within 6 weeks of surgery is recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines and the Commission on Cancer. Although individual-level measures of socioeconomic status are associated with receipt of timely, guideline-adherent PORT, the role of neighborhood-level disadvantage has not been examined. Objective: To characterize the association of neighborhood-level disadvantage with delays in receiving PORT. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included 681 adult patients with HNSCC undergoing curative-intent surgery and PORT from 2018 to 2020 at 4 US academic medical centers. The data were analyzed between June 21, 2023, and March 5, 2024. Main Outcome Measures and Measures: The primary outcome was delay in initiating guideline-adherent PORT (ie, >6 weeks after surgery). Time-to-PORT (TTP) was a secondary outcome. Census block-level Area Deprivation Index (ADI) scores were calculated and reported as national percentiles (0-100); higher scores indicate greater deprivation. The association of ADI scores with PORT delay was assessed using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for demographic, clinical, and institutional characteristics. PORT initiation across ADI score population quartiles was evaluated with cumulative incidence plots and Cox models. Results: Among 681 patients with HNSCC undergoing surgery and PORT (mean [SD] age, 61.5 [11.2] years; 487 [71.5%] men, 194 [29.5%] women) the PORT delay rate was 60.8% (414/681) and median (IQR) TTP was 46 (40-56) days. The median (IQR) ADI score was 62.0 (44.0-83.0). Each 25-point increase in ADI score was associated with a corresponding 32% increase in the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of PORT delay (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.07-1.63) on multivariable regression adjusted for institution, age, race and ethnicity, insurance, comorbidity, cancer subsite, stage, postoperative complications, care fragmentation, travel distance, and rurality. Increasing ADI score population quartiles were associated with increasing TTP (hazard ratio of PORT initiation, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53-0.96; 0.59; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77; and 0.54; 95% CI, 0.41-0.72; for ADI quartiles 2, 3, and 4 vs ADI quartile 1, respectively). Conclusions and Relevance: Increasing neighborhood-level disadvantage was independently associated with a greater likelihood of PORT delay and longer TTP in a dose-dependent manner. These findings indicate a critical need for the development of multilevel strategies to improve the equitable delivery of timely, guideline-adherent PORT.

Use of Diagnostic Audiology and Cochlear Implantation in the US.

This study examined if cochlear implant (CI) use varies geographically within the US and if diagnostic audiology use correlates with CI usage.

Poor Dental Health as a Risk Factor for Alveolar Ridge Malignancies.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between poor dental health and risk of oral cavity squamous cell cancer (OCSCC) at individual tumor subsites. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control and cross-sectional METHODS: A case-control study was performed using a population-based cohort in North Carolina (Carolina Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Study [CHANCE]). A secondary cross-sectional analysis was performed with an institutional cohort (WashU/Siteman). Cases were adults with primary OCSCC and an identifiable tumor subsite. In the CHANCE cohort, controls were adults without head and neck cancer. In the Washington University/Siteman cohort, patients with tongue cancer served as the comparator group. We used number of missing teeth (categorized 0-6, 7-24, 25-28) as a surrogate for poor dental health, which was self-reported in CHANCE and measured on a pretreatment computed tomography scan in the WashU/Siteman study. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for missing teeth were estimated for each tumor subsite using binomial logistic regression models. RESULTS: Near complete tooth loss (25-28 teeth) was associated with a 3.5-fold increased risk of alveolar ridge malignancy (aOR: 3.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.14-11.01, P = .03) in the CHANCE study. This association was confirmed in our cross-sectional analysis (WashU/Siteman study) where missing 25-28 teeth was associated with an increased risk of alveolar ridge compared to tongue cancer (aOR: 4.60; 95% CI: 1.97-11.10, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests an association between poor dental health and risk of alveolar ridge cancer independent of smoking, alcohol use, age, race, and sex. Future prospective and translational studies are needed to confirm this association and elucidate the mechanism of dental disease in alveolar ridge malignancies.