Hematology and Oncology Fellow Education About Sexual and Reproductive Health: A Survey of Program Directors in the United States.

PURPOSE: Clinical oncology guidelines recommend addressing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) concerns in routine cancer care. However, limited training often hinders clinicians' ability to do so effectively. The objective of this study was to understand the state of current fellowship education on SRH (ie, sexual health, safe sex practices, and fertility) through conducting a national survey of US hematology/oncology fellowship program directors (PDs). METHODS: A survey was sent to all PDs of adult hematology/oncology fellowship programs in the United States via online link. PDs who did not complete the survey were sent up to four follow-up emails and a paper mailing. Descriptive statistics and McNemar tests were conducted. RESULTS: One hundred-fourteen PDs responded (65%). Fewer programs offered formal instruction on sexual health (49%) and safe sex practices (37%) compared with fertility (75%). Informal training in SRH relied heavily on direct clinical experience (73%-78% of programs), with other methods (eg, case-based approaches, webinars, and journal clubs) being less common. Lack of experts to provide instruction was the most commonly cited barrier to offering training in SRH, endorsed by 74% for sexual health, 68% for safe sex practices, and 54% for fertility; difficulty finding space within the curriculum (50%; 54%; and 43%, respectively) and a lack of training requirements were also commonly endorsed (57%; 60%; and 35%, respectively). Barriers were endorsed more commonly for sexual health topics than fertility. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the scarcity of training in SRH, particularly in sexual health, within hematology/oncology fellowship programs. The heavy reliance on informal instruction methods may lead to inconsistent and inadequate education. Efforts to integrate comprehensive training in SRH into fellowship programs are crucial to ensuring that such concerns are included in routine cancer care.

Effect of neighborhood and individual-level socioeconomic factors on breast cancer screening adherence in a multi-ethnic study.

BACKGROUND: Although mammography can significantly reduce breast cancer mortality, many women do not receive their annual breast cancer screening. Differences in screening adherence exist by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), and insurance status. However, more detailed investigations into the impact of neighborhood disadvantage and access to resources on screening adherence are lacking. METHODS: We comprehensively examined the effect of individual social, economic, and demographic factors (n = 34 variables), as well as neighborhood level SES (nSES) indicators (n = 10 variables) on breast cancer screening adherence across a multi-ethnic population (n = 472). In this cross-sectional study, participants were surveyed from 2017 to 2018. The data was analyzed using univariate regression and LASSO for variable reduction. Significant predictors were carried forward into final multivariable mixed-effect logistic regression models where odds ratios (OR), 95% confidence intervals and p-values were reported. RESULTS: Nineteen percent of participants were non-adherent to breast screening guidelines. Race/ethnicity was not associated with adherence; however, increasing age (OR = 0.97, 95%CI = 0.95-0.99, p = 0.01), renting a home (OR = 0.53, 95%CI = 0.30-0.94, p = 0.04), food insecurity (OR 0.46, 95%CI = 0.22-0.94, p = 0.01), and overcrowding (OR = 0.58, 95% CI = 0.32-0.94, p = 0.01) were significantly associated with lower breast cancer screening adherence. CONCLUSION: Socioeconomic indicators at the individual and neighborhood levels impact low breast cancer screening adherence and may help to inform future screening interventions.

Defining aggressive prostate cancer: a geospatial perspective.

BACKGROUND: Spatial analysis can identify communities where men are at risk for aggressive prostate cancer (PCan) and need intervention. However, there are several definitions for aggressive PCan. In this study, we evaluate geospatial patterns of 3 different aggressive PCan definitions in relation to PCan-specific mortality and provide methodologic and practical insights into how each definition may affect intervention targets. METHODS: Using the Pennsylvania State Cancer Registry data (2005-2015), we used 3 definitions to assign "aggressive" status to patients diagnosed with PCan. Definition one (D1, recently recommended as the primary definition, given high correlation with PCan death) was based on staging criteria T4/N1/M1 or Gleason score ≥ 8. Definition two (D2, most frequently-used definition in geospatial studies) included distant SEER summary stage. Definition three (D3) included Gleason score ≥ 7 only. Using Bayesian spatial models, we identified geographic clusters of elevated odds ratios for aggressive PCan (binomial model) for each definition and compared overlap between those clusters to clusters of elevated hazard ratios for PCan-specific mortality (Cox regression). RESULTS: The number of "aggressive" PCan cases varied by definition, and influenced quantity, location, and extent/size of geographic clusters in binomial models. While spatial patterns overlapped across all three definitions, using D2 in binomial models provided results most akin to PCan-specific mortality clusters as identified through Cox regression. This approach resulted in fewer clusters for targeted intervention and less sensitive to missing data compared to definitions that rely on clinical TNM staging. CONCLUSIONS: Using D2, based on distant SEER summary stage, in future research may facilitate consistency and allow for standardized comparison across geospatial studies.

Venous thromboembolism in metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PC) carries a high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Several risk assessment models (RAMs) predict benefit of thromboprophylaxis in solid tumors; however, none are verified in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). METHODS: A retrospective mPC cohort treated at an academic cancer center from 2010 to 2016 was investigated for VTE incidence (VTEmets). Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess multiple VTE risk factors. Overall survival (OS) was compared between mPC groups with and without VTE. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival plots and Cox proportional hazards regressions. RESULTS: 400 mPC patients (median age 66; 52% males) were included. 87% had performance status of ECOG 0-1; 70% had advanced stage at PC diagnosis. Incidence of VTEmets was 17.5%; median time of occurrence 3.48 months after mPC diagnosis. Survival analysis started at median VTE occurrence. Median OS was 10.5 months in VTEmets vs. 13.4 in non-VTE group. Only advanced stage (OR 3.7, p = .001) correlated with increased VTE risk. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest mPC carries a significant VTE burden. VTE predicts poor outcomes from the point of median VTE occurrence. Advanced stage disease is the strongest risk factor. Future studies are needed to define risk stratification, survival benefit, and choice of thromboprophylaxis.

Starting the Conversation: randomized pilot trial of an intervention to promote effective clinical communication about sexual health for gynecologic cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: Gynecologic cancer survivors often hesitate to raise sexual health concerns with their clinicians. We pilot tested Starting the Conversation (STC), a theory-guided intervention aimed at facilitating survivors' clinical communication about sexual health. METHODS: Survivors (N = 32) were randomized 2:1 to STC (23-min video and accompanying workbook grounded in social cognitive theory that provides information and skills training for communicating with providers about sexual concerns, and resource guide) or control (resource guide only). Feasibility was assessed through enrollment, retention, and intervention completion rates (benchmarks: 60%, 80%, 70%); acceptability was assessed through post-intervention program evaluations (benchmark: 75%). Preliminary effects were assessed for sexual health communication (self-reported after next clinic encounter), self-efficacy for clinical communication about sexual health (post-intervention and 2-month follow-up), and sexual activity and anxiety/depressive symptoms (2-month follow-up). RESULTS: All feasibility/acceptability benchmarks were surpassed; 76% enrolled, 97% retained, ≥ 95% used intervention materials, and 100% endorsed STC as acceptable. Positive STC effects were seen for increases in self-efficacy (Cohen's d's = 0.45 at post-intervention; 0.55 at follow-up). In STC, 35% and 45% of women raised or asked about sexual health concerns during the post-intervention clinic visit, respectively, versus 0 and 27% in the control arm. Other measures showed little change. CONCLUSIONS: Data support the STC intervention as feasible and acceptable, with promising effects for gynecologic cancer survivors' communication about sexual health concerns. Because sexual health communication is relevant across the treatment trajectory, we included both on-treatment and post-treatment survivors. While this may be a limitation, it could also enhance sample generalizability. A larger trial is needed to determine efficacy. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Communication about sexual health is important yet lacking for cancer survivors. Patient-focused interventions may help address concerns and improve survivors' health outcomes.

The effect of social determinants of health on utilization of surgical treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma patients.

BACKGROUND: A paucity of data exists on how social determinants of health (SDOH) influence treatment for Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We investigated associations between SDOH (healthcare access, education, social/community context, economic stability, and built/neighborhood environment) and receipt of surgery. METHODS: The Pennsylvania Liver Cancer Registry was linked with neighborhood SDOH from the American Community Survey. Multilevel logistic regression models with patient and neighborhood SDOH variables were developed. RESULTS: Of 9423 HCC patients, 2393 were stage I. Only 36.3% of stage I patients received surgery. Black patients had significantly lower odds of surgery vs Whites (OR = 0.73; p < 0.01), but not after adjustments for SDOH. All 5 SDOH domains were associated with odds of surgery overall; 2 domains were associated in Stage I patients, social context (e.g., racial concentration, p = 0.03) and insurance access (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: SDOH impact utilization of surgery for HCC. Findings can guide healthcare professionals to create programs for populations at risk for poor liver cancer outcomes.

Understanding clinical communication about mood disturbance symptoms among breast cancer patients: A mixed methods analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to characterize the relationships between breast cancer patient mood symptom severity and demographic/medical factors with clinical communication about mood, and to explore mood discussion content. METHODS: 134 breast cancer patients (mean age=58.3; 14% minority; 13% metastatic) had oncology clinic visits audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for mood communication. Patient Care Monitor assessed mood symptoms (anxiety/depression presence/severity). Logistic regressions measured associations between mood, demographic/medical factors, and communication. Thematic analysis characterized discussion topics. RESULTS: Over half of patients (55%; n = 73) reported mood symptoms. Worse mood symptoms were associated with younger age and current treatment (p's < 0.05). 19% of clinic visits (n = 26/134) contained mood discussions. Discussions were more common for younger women and those with non-metastatic disease (p's < 0.05). Odds of discussing mood increased with symptom severity (OR=4.52, p = 0.018). Cancer-related anxiety and medication management were among the most common topics discussed. CONCLUSIONS: Communication about mood occurred infrequently, with women currently undergoing treatment, with metastatic disease, or with mild mood symptoms at potentially increased risk for inadequate discussion. Both patient-focused and provider-focused interventions to improve clinical communication about mood symptoms could be beneficial. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians hold a key role in supporting cancer patients' well-being by using and encouraging effective communication about patients' mood.

Systematic review of neighborhood socioeconomic indices studied across the cancer control continuum.

BACKGROUND: There is extensive interest in understanding how neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES) may affect cancer incidence or survival. However, variability regarding items included and approaches used to form a composite nSES index presents challenges in summarizing overall associations with cancer. Given recent calls for standardized measures of neighborhood sociodemographic effects in cancer disparity research, the objective of this systematic review was to identify and compare existing nSES indices studied across the cancer continuum (incidence, screening, diagnosis, treatment, survival/mortality) and summarize associations by race/ethnicity and cancer site to inform future cancer disparity studies. METHODS: Using PRISMA guidelines, peer-reviewed articles published between 2010 and 2019 containing keywords related to nSES and cancer were identified in PubMed. RESULTS: Twenty-four nSES indices were identified from 75 studies. In general, findings indicated a significant association between nSES and cancer outcomes (n = 64/75 studies; 85.33%), with 42/64 (65.63%) adjusting for highly-correlated individual SES factors (e.g., education). However, the direction of association differed by cancer site, race/ethnicity, and nSES index. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights several methodologic and conceptual issues surrounding nSES measurement and potential associations with cancer disparities. Recommendations pertaining to the selection of nSES measures are provided, which may help inform disparity-related disease processes and improve the identification of vulnerable populations in need of intervention.

Effect of Neighborhood and Individual-Level Socioeconomic Factors on Colorectal Cancer Screening Adherence.

Despite the effectiveness of screenings in reducing colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality, ~25% of US adults do not adhere to screening guidelines. Prior studies associate socioeconomic status (SES) with low screening adherence and suggest that neighborhood deprivation can influence CRC outcomes. We comprehensively investigated the effect of neighborhood SES circumstances (nSES), individual SES, and race/ethnicity on adherence to CRC screening in a multiethnic cross-sectional study. Participant surveys assessing 32 individual-level socioeconomic and healthcare access measures were administered from 2017 to 2018. Participant data were joined with nine nSES measures from the US Census at the census tract level. Univariate, LASSO, and multivariable mixed-effect logistic regression models were used for variable reduction and evaluation of associations. The total study population included 526 participants aged 50-85; 29% of participants were non-adherent. In the final multivariable model, age (p = 0.02) and Non-Hispanic Black race (p = 0.02) were associated with higher odds of adherence. Factors associated with lower adherence were home rental (vs. ownership) (p = 0.003), perception of low healthcare quality (p = 0.006), no routine checkup within two years (p = 0.002), perceived discrimination (p = 0.02), and nSES deprivation (p = 0.02). After comprehensive variable methods were applied, socioeconomic indicators at the neighborhood and individual level were found to contribute to low CRC screening adherence.

Efficacy of a multimedia intervention in facilitating breast cancer patients' clinical communication about sexual health: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Many women with breast cancer (BC) hesitate to raise sexual concerns clinically. We evaluated a multimedia intervention to facilitate BC patients' communication about sexual/menopausal health, called Starting the Conversation (STC). METHODS: Female BC patients (N = 144) were randomly assigned to either STC (20-min video, workbook, and resource guide) or control (resource guide only). Audio-recorded dialogue from patients' next oncology clinic encounter was coded for patients' sexual health communication. Self-report surveys assessed patients' beliefs about sexual health communication, self-efficacy for clinical interactions, sexual function/activity, anxiety/depression symptoms, and quality of life at baseline, post-intervention, and 2-month follow-up. T-tests or mixed-effects logistic regression compared study arms. RESULTS: Women in the STC arm were more likely to raise the topic of sexual health (51%; OR = 2.62 [1.02, 6.69], p = 0.04) and ask a sexual health question (40%; OR = 2.85 [1.27, 6.38], p = 0.01) during their clinic encounter than those in the control arm (30% and 19% for raise and ask, respectively). At follow-up, women in the STC arm showed greater improvements in sexual health communication self-efficacy (p = 0.009) and in anxiety symptoms (p = 0.03), and more women were sexually active at follow-up, compared to the control arm (OR = 1.5, 70% vs. 46%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The STC intervention facilitated women's clinical communication about sexual health and reduced women's anxiety, possibly due to increased confidence in expressing their medical needs. Helpful information gained from clinical discussions could have improved women's willingness or ability to engage in sexual activity. Future studies should identify aspects of the clinical encounter most critical to improving women's sexual outcomes.

Liver Cancer Incidence and Area-Level Geographic Disparities in Pennsylvania-A Geo-Additive Approach.

Many neighborhood socioeconomic index measures (nSES) that capture neighborhood deprivation exist but the impact of measure selection on liver cancer (LC) geographic disparities remains unclear. We introduce a Bayesian geoadditive modeling approach to identify clusters in Pennsylvania (PA) with higher than expected LC incidence rates, adjusted for individual-level factors (age, sex, race, diagnosis year) and compared them to models with 7 different nSES index measures to elucidate the impact of nSES and measure selection on LC geospatial variation. LC cases diagnosed from 2007-2014 were obtained from the PA Cancer Registry and linked to nSES measures from U.S. census at the Census Tract (CT) level. Relative Risks (RR) were estimated for each CT, adjusted for individual-level factors (baseline model). Each nSES measure was added to the baseline model and changes in model fit, geographic disparity and state-wide RR ranges were compared. All 7 nSES measures were strongly associated with high risk clusters. Tract-level RR ranges and geographic disparity from the baseline model were attenuated after adjustment for nSES measures. Depending on the nSES measure selected, up to 60% of the LC burden could be explained, suggesting methodologic evaluations of multiple nSES measures may be warranted in future studies to inform LC prevention efforts.

Towards precision public health: Geospatial analytics and sensitivity/specificity assessments to inform liver cancer prevention.

OBJECTIVES: Liver cancer (LC) continues to rise, partially due to limited resources for prevention. To test the precision public health (PPH) hypothesis that fewer areas in need of LC prevention could be identified by combining existing surveillance data, we compared the sensitivity/specificity of standard recommendations to target geographic areas using U.S. Census demographic data only (percent (%) Hispanic, Black, and those born 1950-1959) to an alternative approach that couples additional geospatial data, including neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), with LC disease statistics. METHODS: Pennsylvania Cancer Registry data from 2007-2014 were linked to 2010 U.S. Census data at the Census tract (CT) level. CTs in the top 80th percentile for 3 standard demographic variables, %Hispanic, %Black, %born 1950-1959, were identified. Spatial scan statistics (SatScan) identified CTs with significantly elevated incident LC rates (p-value<0.05), adjusting for age, gender, diagnosis year. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) of a CT being located in an elevated risk cluster and/or testing positive/negative for at least one standard variable were calculated. nSES variables (deprivation, stability, segregation) significantly associated with LC in regression models (p < 0.05) were systematically evaluated for improvements in sensitivity/specificity. RESULTS: 9,460 LC cases were diagnosed across 3,217 CTs. 1,596 CTs were positive for at least one of 3 standard variables. 5 significant elevated risk clusters (CTs = 402) were identified. 324 CTs were positive for a high risk cluster AND standard variable (sensitivity = 92%; specificity = 37%; PPV = 17.4%). Incorporation of 3 new nSES variables with one standard variable (%Black) further improved sensitivity (93%), specificity (62.9%), and PPV (26.3%). CONCLUSIONS: We introduce a quantitative assessment of PPH by applying established sensitivity/specificity assessments to geospatial data. Coupling existing disease cluster and nSES data can more precisely identify intervention targets with a liver cancer burden than standard demographic variables. Thus, this approach may inform prioritization of limited resources for liver cancer prevention.

The effect of neighborhood social environment on prostate cancer development in black and white men at high risk for prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Neighborhood socioeconomic (nSES) factors have been implicated in prostate cancer (PCa) disparities. In line with the Precision Medicine Initiative that suggests clinical and socioenvironmental factors can impact PCa outcomes, we determined whether nSES variables are associated with time to PCa diagnosis and could inform PCa clinical risk assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample included 358 high risk men (PCa family history and/or Black race), aged 35-69 years, enrolled in an early detection program. Patient variables were linked to 78 nSES variables (employment, income, etc.) from previous literature via geocoding. Patient-level models, including baseline age, prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal exam, as well as combined models (patient plus nSES variables) by race/PCa family history subgroups were built after variable reduction methods using Cox regression and LASSO machine-learning. Model fit of patient and combined models (AIC) were compared; p-values<0.05 were significant. Model-based high/low nSES exposure scores were calculated and the 5-year predicted probability of PCa was plotted against PSA by high/low neighborhood score to preliminarily assess clinical relevance. RESULTS: In combined models, nSES variables were significantly associated with time to PCa diagnosis. Workers mode of transportation and low income were significant in White men with a PCa family history. Homeownership (%owner-occupied houses with >3 bedrooms) and unemployment were significant in Black men with and without a PCa family history, respectively. The 5-year predicted probability of PCa was higher in men with a high neighborhood score (weighted combination of significant nSES variables) compared to a low score (e.g., Baseline PSA level of 4ng/mL for men with PCa family history: White-26.7% vs 7.7%; Black-56.2% vs 29.7%). DISCUSSION: Utilizing neighborhood data during patient risk assessment may be useful for high risk men affected by disparities. However, future studies with larger samples and validation/replication steps are needed.

Understanding Sexual Help-Seeking for Women With Breast Cancer: What Distinguishes Women Who Seek Help From Those Who Do Not?

BACKGROUND: Sexual problems are extremely common for women after breast cancer (BC). AIM: To determine, in a sample of BC outpatients, how commonly women sought help for sexual concerns, from a health care provider (HCP), from other individuals, or from alternate sources; and to examine whether help-seeking was associated with women's sexual function/activity, self-efficacy for clinical communication about sexual health, or sociodemographic/medical characteristics. METHODS: BC patients participating in a sexual/menopausal health communication intervention trial completed web-based baseline self-report surveys. One-way analysis of variances compared effects of the level of sexual help-seeking (none; 1 outlet; 2-3 outlets) on sexual function domains. Chi-square or t-tests compared women seeking help with those not seeking help on other study variables. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient-reported outcome instruments assessed sexual help-seeking (past month), sexual function and activity (PROMIS Sexual Function and Satisfaction Brief Profile Version 2.0), and self-efficacy (confidence) for communicating with their BC clinician about sexual health. RESULTS: 144 women (mean age = 56.0 years; 62% partnered; 67% white; 27% black/African American; 4% Hispanic/Latina; 15% stage IV) participated in this study. 49% of women sought help for sexual concerns, most often from intimate partners, family and/or friends (42%), followed by HCPs (24%), or online/print materials (19%); very few women (n = 4; 3%) sought help only from a HCP. Women seeking help were younger and more likely to be partnered and sexually active than those not seeking help. Sexual function was impaired for all domains but was most impaired for sexual interest. Among sexually active women, those seeking help from 2 to 3 sources reported worse sexual function in certain domains (sexual interest, lubrication, vaginal discomfort, vulvar discomfort-labial, satisfaction). Women seeking help from outlets other than HCPs had significantly lower self-efficacy than those who did not. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: BC patients with access to a partner and who are sexually active but find sex unsatisfying, uncomfortable, or lack interest may be in particular need of sexual help. Further, women may turn to outlets other than HCPs for sexual help partly because they lack the confidence to do so with a HCP. Sexual health information should be made available to women's partners, family, and friends, so they may effectively discuss such issues if needed. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: Strengths of the study included examination of a range of sexual function domains and a theoretical construct in relation to BC patients' sexual help-seeking and a medically diverse sample. Limitations include a cross-sectional design. CONCLUSION: Women treated for BC should receive accurate and timely sexual health information. Reese JB, Sorice KA, Pollard W, et al. Understanding Sexual Help-Seeking for Women With Breast Cancer: What Distinguishes Women Who Seek Help From Those Who Do Not? J Sex Med 2020;17:1729-1739.

Communication about Sexual Health in Breast Cancer: What Can We Learn from Patients' Self-Report and Clinic Dialogue?

OBJECTIVE: Research assessing clinical communication about sexual health is limited. We compared clinical communication about sexual health across patients' self-reports and coded dialogue in breast cancer outpatients. METHODS: 134 patients had clinic visits audio-recorded and coded for sexual health communication and completed self-report questionnaires immediately after the visit. Associations between the self-report and dialogue were assessed using Phi coefficient. Agreements (present/absent) and discrepancies (omissions, commissions) about discussed topics were classified and discrepancies analyzed for themes. RESULTS: Sexual health was discussed in 61 of 134 patient visits (46%). Associations were significant (p < .01) but differed by topic (φ = .27-.76). 37 women (23%) had ≥ 1 self-report error. Discrepancies were common (19 omissions, 29 commissions). Patients often omitted communication about sexual concerns when such concerns were not problematic, and interpreted non-specific discussions as including specific topics of concern, even when not explicitly stated. Omissions were more common for women with lower education. CONCLUSIONS: Patients' reports of whether sexual health communication occurs does not always align with observed dialogue, and may vary by personal relevance of the topic. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: There are limitations in determining the prevalence of clinical communication about sexual health through patient self-report. Explaining sexual health terms might enhance shared understanding.

Evaluating a couple-based intervention addressing sexual concerns for breast cancer survivors: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Sexual concerns are distressing for breast cancer survivors and interfere with their intimate relationships. This study evaluates the efficacy of a four-session couple-based intervention delivered via telephone, called Intimacy Enhancement (IE). The IE intervention is grounded in social cognitive theory and integrates evidence-based techniques from cognitive behavioral couple therapy and sex therapy to address survivors' sexual concerns and enhance their and their partners' sexual, relationship, and psychological outcomes. METHODS: This trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy of the IE intervention in improving survivors' sexual function, the primary study outcome. Secondary outcomes include survivors' sexual distress, partners' sexual function, and survivors' and partners' relationship intimacy and quality as well as psychological distress (depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms). Additional aims are to examine whether treatment effects on patient sexual function are mediated by sexual communication and self-efficacy for coping with sexual concerns and to explore whether survivor age and race/ethnicity moderate intervention effects on survivors' sexual function. Eligible adult female breast cancer survivors reporting sexual concerns and their intimate partners are recruited from two academic sites in the USA and are randomized to either the IE intervention or to a control condition of equal length offering education and support around breast cancer-related health topics (Living Healthy Together). The target sample size is 120 couples. Self-report outcome measures are administered to participants in both conditions at baseline (T1), post-treatment (T2), 3 months post-treatment (T3), and 6 months post-treatment (T4). DISCUSSION: Evidence-based interventions are needed to address sexual concerns for breast cancer survivors and to enhance their and their intimate partners' sexual, relationship, and psychological well-being. This randomized controlled trial will allow us to examine the efficacy of a novel couple-based intervention delivered via telephone for breast cancer survivors experiencing sexual concerns and their intimate partners, in comparison with an attention control. Findings of this study could influence clinical care for women with breast cancer and inform theory guiding cancer-related sexual rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03930797. Registered on 24 April 2019.

Why do breast cancer survivors decline a couple-based intimacy enhancement intervention trial?

Recruitment challenges hinder behavioral intervention research in cancer survivors. The purpose was to examine the reasons for declining and intervention preferences of study-eligible breast cancer survivors declining a trial of a four-session couple-based Intimacy Enhancement intervention (refusers) and explore whether refusers differed from participants on key characteristics. Partnered, post-treatment breast cancer survivors reporting sexual concerns who were eligible for but declined participation in the intervention trial were approached to complete a standardized 5-min telephone survey assessing reasons for declining and support preferences. Demographic, clinical, and sexual concerns information were collected during screening. Trial participants and refusers were compared on key variables of age, race, hormone therapy use, time since treatment, level of sexual concerns, and recruitment method using t-tests or chi-square tests. Among the 31 women who declined the trial and completed the survey, the most common reasons for declining were time commitment (74%) and partner noninterest (32%). Most (61%) reported that the telephone format played little to no role in their refusal. Eighty-one percent wanted their partners involved in a program addressing sexual concerns. The two most preferred resources were informational websites (45%) and meeting with a professional (26%). Trial participants and refusers did not differ on any key factors examined. Developing intimacy interventions that are very brief, partner-optional, or that use stepped care may bolster uptake. The methods used to examine study-eligible candidates' needs and preferences could be employed in other health populations, thus having broader implications for research design.

A brief intervention to enhance breast cancer clinicians' communication about sexual health: Feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Sexual concerns are often unaddressed for breast cancer patients; one reason is inadequate clinician training. We examined the feasibility, acceptability, and potential benefits of a novel intervention, improving Sexual Health and Augmenting Relationships through Education (iSHARE) for breast cancer clinicians. METHODS: Clinicians received training in communicating about sexual concerns with breast cancer patients. Intervention feasibility and acceptability were measured through enrollment/participation and postintervention program evaluations, respectively. Intervention effects were assessed through (1) clinician self-reported beliefs about sexual health communication, assessed at baseline, post-intervention, and 1- or 6-month follow-up, (2) clinical communication coded from audio recorded, transcribed clinic encounters at preintervention or postintervention, and (3) patient satisfaction with clinical care, reported immediately after the clinic visit. Patients also reported sociodemographic characteristics and level of sexual concerns. RESULTS: Seven breast cancer clinicians enrolled (88% participation), completed the intervention, and were audio recorded in clinic encounters with 134 breast cancer outpatients (67 each at preintervention or postintervention). Program evaluations supported intervention acceptability. Effect sizes suggest iSHARE increased clinicians' self-efficacy (d = 0.27) and outcome expectancies for communicating about sexual concerns (d = 0.69) and reduced communication barriers (d = -0.14). Clinicians' sexual health communication behaviors increased from baseline to postintervention, including for raising the topic (28% vs 48%), asking questions (33% vs 45%), and offering information (18% vs 24%). Neither patient satisfaction nor duration of sexual health communication changed (mean duration less than 1 minute at both time points). CONCLUSIONS: The iSHARE intervention was feasible and well received by clinicians and may change breast cancer clinicians' beliefs and communication behaviors regarding sexual health.