Geographic distance to Commission on Cancer-accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in the United States.

PURPOSE: The Commission on Cancer (CoC) establishes standards to support multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care. CoC-accredited cancer programs diagnose and/or treat 73% of patients in the United States. However, rural patients may experience diminished access to CoC-accredited cancer programs. Our study evaluated distance to hospitals by CoC accreditation status, rurality, and Census Division. METHODS: All US hospitals were identified from public-use Homeland Infrastructure Foundation-Level Data, then merged with CoC-accreditation data. Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) were used to categorize counties as metro (RUCC 1-3), large rural (RUCC 4-6), or small rural (RUCC 7-9). Distance from each county centroid to the nearest CoC and non-CoC hospital was calculated using the Great Circle Distance method in ArcGIS. FINDINGS: Of 1,382 CoC-accredited hospitals, 89% were in metro counties. Small rural counties contained a total of 30 CoC and 794 non-CoC hospitals. CoC hospitals were located 4.0, 10.1, and 11.5 times farther away than non-CoC hospitals for residents of metro, large rural, and small rural counties, respectively, while the average distance to non-CoC hospitals was similar across groups (9.4-13.6 miles). Distance to CoC-accredited facilities was greatest west of the Mississippi River, in particular the Mountain Division (99.2 miles). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar proximity to non-CoC hospitals across groups, CoC hospitals are located farther from large and small rural counties than metro counties, suggesting rural patients have diminished access to multidisciplinary, comprehensive cancer care afforded by CoC-accredited hospitals. Addressing distance-based access barriers to high-quality, comprehensive cancer treatment in rural US communities will require a multisectoral approach.

Rural comprehensive cancer care: Qualitative analysis of current challenges and opportunities.

PURPOSE: While limited resources can make high-quality, comprehensive, coordinated cancer care provision challenging in rural settings, rural cancer patients often rely on local hospitals for care. To develop resources and strategies to support high-quality local cancer care, it is critical to understand the current experiences of rural cancer care physicians, including perceived strengths and challenges of providing cancer care in rural areas.  METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 cancer providers associated with all 12 non-metropolitan/rural Iowa hospitals that diagnose or treat >100 cancer patients annually. Iterative thematic analysis was conducted to develop domains. FINDINGS: Participants identified geographic proximity and sense of community as strengths of local care. They described decision-making processes and challenges related to referring patients to larger centers for complex procedures, including a lack of dedicated navigators to facilitate and track transfers between institutions and occasional lack of respect from academic physicians. Participants reported a desire for strengthening collaborations with larger urban/academic cancer centers, including access to educational opportunities, shared resources and strategies to collect and monitor data on quality, and clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Rural cancer care providers are dedicated to providing high-quality care close to home for their patients and would welcome opportunities to increase collaboration with larger centers to improve coordination and comprehensiveness of care, collect and monitor data on quality of care, and access continuing education opportunities. Further research is needed to develop implementation approaches that will extend resources, services, and expertise to rural providers to facilitate high-quality cancer care for all cancer patients.

LGBTQ+ cancer: priority or lip service? A qualitative content analysis of LGBTQ+ considerations in U.S. state, jurisdiction, and tribal comprehensive cancer control plans.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded program, supports cancer coalitions across the United States (US) in efforts to prevent and control cancer including development of comprehensive cancer control (CCC) plans. CCC plans often focus health equity within their priorities, but it is unclear to what extent lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer/questioning, plus (LGBTQ+) populations are considered in CCC plans. We qualitatively examined to what extent LGBTQ+ populations were referenced in 64 U.S. state, jurisdiction, tribes, and tribal organization CCC plans. A total of 55% of CCC plans mentioned LGBTQ+ populations, however, only one in three CCC plans mentioned any kind of LGBTQ+ inequity or LGBTQ+ specific recommendations. Even fewer plans included mention of LGBTQ+ specific resources, organizations, or citations. At the same time almost three fourths of plans conflated sex and gender throughout their CCC plans. The findings of this study highlight the lack of prioritization of LGBTQ+ populations in CCC plans broadly while highlighting exemplar plans that can serve as a roadmap to more inclusive future CCC plans. Comprehensive cancer control plans can serve as a key policy and advocacy structure to promote a focus on LGBTQ+ cancer prevention and control.

Usability of the 4Ms Worksheet in the Emergency Department for Older Patients: A Qualitative Study.

Introduction: Older adults often have multiple comorbidities; therefore, they are at high risk for adverse events after discharge. The 4Ms framework-what matters, medications, mentation, mobility-has been used in acute and ambulatory care settings to identify risk factors for adverse events in older adults, although it has not been used in the emergency department (ED). We aimed to determine whether 1) use of the 4Ms worksheet would help emergency clinicians understand older adult patients' goals of care and 2) use of the worksheet was feasible in the ED. Methods: We conducted a qualitative, descriptive study among patients aged ≥60 years and emergency clinicians from January-June 2022. Patients were asked to fill out a 4Ms worksheet; following this, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients and clinicians separately. We analysed data to create codes, which were divided into categories and sub-categories. Results: A total of 20 older patients and 19 emergency clinicians were interviewed. We identified two categories based on our aims: understanding patient goals of care (sub-categories: clinician/ patient concordance; understanding underlying goals of care; underlying goals of care discrepancy) and use of 4Ms Worksheet (sub-categories: worksheet to discussion discrepancy; challenges using worksheet; challenge completing worksheet before discharge). Rates of concordance between patient and clinician on main concern/goal of care and underlying goals of care were 82.4% and 15.4%, respectively. Conclusion: We found that most patients and emergency clinicians agreed on the main goal of care, although clinicians often failed to elicit patients' underlying goal(s) of care. Additionally, many patients preferred to have the interviewer fill out the worksheet for them. There was often discrepancy between what was written and what was discussed with the interviewer. More research is needed to determine the best way to integrate the 4Ms framework within emergency care.

Comorbid Dementia and Cancer Therapy Decision-Making: A Scoping Review.

Comorbid dementia complicates cancer therapy decision-making in older adults. We aimed to synthesize the recent literature (<5 years) on the challenges associated with cancer therapy decision-making among older people living with dementia (PLWD) and their caregivers. Of the 20,763 references, 8767 had their title and abstract screened, and eight met the inclusion criteria. Six studies were qualitative, one study employed mixed methods, and one study was quasi-experimental. Most studies were conducted in the UK (89%) and reported homogeneity in race and geography. Breast (56%) and prostate (45%) were the most frequent reported cancers. Five studies (56%) reported multiple types of dementia, with two (22%) indicating stages. The studies indicated that communication between patients, caregivers, and clinical teams might alleviate stress caused by worsening health prospects and potential ethical concerns. Information from this review can lead to better-informed, patient-centered treatment decision processes among older PLWD and cancer, their caregivers, and clinicians.

Implicit and explicit: a scoping review exploring the contribution of anthropological practice in implementation science.

BACKGROUND: This study's goal is to identify the existing variation in how, why, and by whom anthropological practice is conducted as part of implementation science projects. As doctorally trained anthropologists, we sought to characterize how and why the term "ethnography" was variously applied in the implementation science literature and characterize the practice of anthropology within and across the field. METHODS: While we follow the PRISMA-ScR checklist, we present the work with a narrative approach to accurately reflect our review process. A health services librarian developed a search strategy using subject headings and keywords for the following databases: PubMed, Embase (Elsevier), Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley), CIHAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (EBSCO), Web of Science Core Collection, and Anthropology Plus (EBSCO). We focused on the practice of anthropology in implementation research conducted in a healthcare setting, in English, with no date restrictions. Studies were included if they applied one or several elements of anthropological methods in terms of study design, data collection, and/or analysis. RESULTS: The database searches produced 3450 results combined after duplicates were removed, which were added to Rayyan for two rounds of screening by title and abstract. A total of 487 articles were included in the full-text screening. Of these, 227 were included and received data extraction that we recorded and analyzed with descriptive statistics in three main domains: (1) anthropological methods; (2) implementation science methods; and (3) study context. We found the use of characteristic tools of anthropology like ethnography and field notes are usually not systematically described but often mentioned. Further, we found that research design decisions and compromises (e.g., length of time in the field, logistics of stakeholder involvement, reconciling diverse firsthand experiences) that often impact anthropological approaches are not systematically described. CONCLUSIONS: Anthropological work often supports larger, mixed-methods implementation projects without being thoroughly reported. Context is essential to anthropological practice and implicitly fundamental to implementation research, yet the goals of anthropology and how its practice informs larger research projects are often not explicitly stated.

Examining provider perceptions and practices for comprehensive geriatric assessment among cancer survivors: a qualitative study with an implementation science focus.

Introduction: Cancer rates increase with age, and older cancer survivors have unique medical care needs, making assessment of health status and identification of appropriate supportive resources key to delivery of optimal cancer care. Comprehensive geriatric assessments (CGAs) help determine an older person's functional capabilities as cancer care providers plan treatment and follow-up care. Despite its proven utility, research on implementation of CGA is lacking. Methods: Guided by a qualitative description approach and through interviews with primary care providers and oncologists, our goal was to better understand barriers and facilitators of CGA use and identify training and support needs for implementation. Participants were identified through Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network partner listservs and a national cancer and aging organization. Potential interviewees, contacted via email, were provided with a description of the study purpose. Eight semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, recorded, and transcribed verbatim by a professional transcription service. The interview guide explored providers' knowledge and use of CGAs. For codebook development, three representative transcripts were independently reviewed and coded by four team members. The interpretive process involved reflecting, transcribing, coding, and searching for and identifying themes. Results: Providers shared that, while it would be ideal to administer CGAs with all new patients, they were not always able to do this. Instead, they used brief screening tools or portions of CGAs, or both. There was variability in how CGA domains were assessed; however, all considered CGAs useful and they communicated with patients about their benefits. Identified facilitators of implementation included having clinic champions, an interdisciplinary care team to assist with implementation and referrals for intervention, and institutional resources and buy-in. Barriers noted included limited staff capacity and competing demands on time, provider inexperience, and misaligned institutional priorities. Discussion: Findings can guide solutions for improving the broader and more systematic use of CGAs in the care of older cancer patients. Uptake of processes like CGA to better identify those at risk of poor outcomes and intervening early to modify treatments are critical to maximize the health of the growing population of older cancer survivors living through and beyond their disease.

Re-visiting the call for translation of cancer survivorship research: collaborative multidisciplinary approaches to improve translation and dissemination.

BACKGROUND: The number of cancer survivors in the US is dramatically increasing and survivors are living longer, making the ongoing care and quality of life in this growing population an important public health issue. Although there has been significant progress in cancer survivorship research, gaps in translating this research to real-world settings to benefit survivors remain. METHODS: The number and type of cancer survivorship research activities in past and current projects were gathered in reports and work plans from the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN). Additionally, current cross-center projects were aligned with common constructs in dissemination and implementation science to provide a narrative review of progress on translational research. RESULTS: A review of historical activities in the CPCRN indicates that there has been consistent engagement in survivorship from multiple institutions over the last decade, generating 84 grants, 168 papers and 162 presentations. The current membership of the Survivorship Workgroup includes multiple disciplines and all 8 participating institutions. Together these Workgroup members have developed 6 projects, all of which address multiple domains in translational research such as feasibility, practicality, and organizational and cultural factors that affect implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This review of past and ongoing activities in the CPCRN suggests that survivorship has been a consistent priority including the translation of evidence-based approaches into practice. Specific gaps in the translational research agenda that could be the focus of future investigations by Workgroup members and others include the practical and logistic aspects of interventions such as cost and policy.

Implementing a Telehealth Shared Counseling and Decision-Making Visit for Lung Cancer Screening in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

Background: Veterans suffer substantial morbidity and mortality from lung cancer. Lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) can reduce mortality. Guidelines recommend counseling and shared decision-making (SDM) to address the benefits and harms of screening and the importance of tobacco cessation before patients undergo screening. Observations: We implemented a centralized LCS program at the Iowa City Veterans Affairs Medical Center with a nurse program coordinator (NPC)-led telephone visit. Our multidisciplinary team ensured that veterans referred from primary care met eligibility criteria, that LDCT results were correctly coded by radiology, and that pulmonary promptly evaluated abnormal LDCT. The NPC mailed a decision aid to the veteran and scheduled a SDM telephone visit. We surveyed veterans after the visit using validated measures to assess knowledge, decisional conflict, and quality of decision making. We conducted 105 SDM visits, and 91 veterans agreed to LDCT. Overall, 84% of veterans reported no decisional conflict, and 59% reported high-quality decision making. While most veterans correctly answered questions about the harms of radiation, false-positive results, and overdiagnosis, few knew when to stop screening, and most overestimated the benefit of screening and the predictive value of an abnormal scan. Tobacco cessation interventions were offered to 72 currently smoking veterans. Conclusions: We successfully implemented an LCS program that provides SDM and tobacco cessation support using a centralized telehealth model. While veterans were confident about screening decisions, knowledge testing indicated important deficits, and many did not engage meaningfully in SDM. Clinicians should frame the decision as patient centered at the time of referral, highlight the importance of SDM, and be able to provide adequate decision support.

From study plans to capacity building: a journey towards health equity in cancer survivorship.

This article highlights the importance of pausing and reflecting on one's motivation, capacity, and positionality when engaging in health equity research and encourages researchers to engage in critical self-reflection and contribute to the ongoing dialogue on the ethical conduct of health equity-focused cancer research. In response to the urgent need to address health disparities and improve health equity in cancer survivorship care, the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) Survivorship workgroup discussed developing a study focused on understanding how racism impacts patient engagement in cancer survivorship care. However, during the study's development, the workgroup recognized limitations in research team composition and infrastructure. The workgroup engaged in critical self-reflections, individually and collectively, leading to the halting of the research study. Consequently, they redirected their efforts towards strengthening the necessary infrastructure for conducting such research, including diverse investigator representation and equitable partnerships with cancer survivors. The description of this process, along with suggestions for reflection, may be helpful and informative to other researchers and research networks seeking to center marginalized voices and work in partnership to address healthcare and health equity.

Older adults' goals of care in the emergency department setting: A qualitative study guided by the 4Ms framework.

Background: We sought to identify what matters to older adults (60 years and older) presenting to the emergency department (ED) and the challenges or concerns they identify related to medication, mobility, and mentation to inform how the 4Ms framework could improve care of older adults in the ED setting. Methods: A qualitative study was conducted using the 4Ms to identify what matters to older adults (≥60 years old) presenting to the ED and what challenges or concerns they identify related to medication, mobility, and mentation. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a convenience sample of patients in a single ED. Interview guide responses and interviewer field notes were entered into REDCap. Interviews were reviewed by the research team (2 coders per interview) who inductively assigned codes. A codebook was created through an iterative process and was used to group codes into themes and sub-themes within the 4Ms framework. Results: A total of 20 ED patients participated in the interviews lasting 30-60 minutes. Codes identified for "what matters" included problem-oriented expectation, coordination and continuity, staying engaged, being with family, and getting back home. Codes related to the other 4Ms (medication, mobility, and mentation) described challenges. Medication challenges included: non-adherence, side effects, polypharmacy, and knowledge. Mobility challenges included physical activity and independence. Last, mentation challenges included memory concerns, depressed mood, and stress and worry. Conclusions: Our study used the 4Ms to identify "what matters" to older adults presenting to the ED and the challenges they face regarding medication, mobility, and mentation. Understanding what matters to patients and the specific challenges they face can help shape and individualize a patient-centered approach to care to facilitate the goals of care discussion and handoff to the next care team.

Examination of Predictors of Pain at 12 Months Postdiagnosis in Head and Neck Cancer Survivors.

OBJECTIVE: Pain following the completion of treatment is important but has received less attention in the head and neck cancer (HNC) literature. The present study sought to examine the prevalence and predictors of pain measured 12 months postdiagnosis and its impact on HNC-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in 1038 HNC survivors. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Single-institution tertiary care center. METHODS: Pain was measured using a single item ranging from 0 to 10 with 0 representing no pain and 10 representing the worst pain possible. Self-reported depressive symptomatology was measured using the Beck Depression Inventory and self-reported problem alcohol use was measured by the Short Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test. HNC-specific HRQOL was measured using the Head and Neck Cancer Inventory (HNCI). RESULTS: Hierarchical multivariable linear regression analyses indicated that in addition to pain at 3 months postdiagnosis (ß = .145, t = 3.18, sr2 = .019, p = .002), both depressive symptomatology (ß = .110, t = 2.49, sr2 = .011, p = .015) and problem alcohol use (ß = .092, t = 2.07, sr2 = .008, p = .039) were significant predictors of pain at 12 months postdiagnosis. Subgroup analyses suggest that across all 4 HNCI domains, those in the moderate and severe pain groups at 12 months postdiagnosis failed to reach 70 which is indicative of high functioning. CONCLUSION: Pain in patients with HNC is a considerable issue at 12 months postdiagnosis, deserving further attention. Behavioral factors such as depression and problem alcohol use may be associated with pain and require systematic screening over time to identify and treat issues that impact optimal long-term recovery from HNC, including disease-specific HRQOL.

The special sauce of the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network: 20 years of lessons learned in developing the evidence base, building community capacity, and translating research into practice.

PURPOSE: The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network (CPCRN) is a national network focused on accelerating the translation of cancer prevention and control research evidence into practice through collaborative, multicenter projects in partnership with diverse communities. From 2003 to 2022, the CPCRN included 613 members. METHODS: We: (1) characterize the extent and nature of collaborations through a bibliometric analysis of 20 years of Network publications; and (2) describe key features and functions of the CPCRN as related to organizational structure, productivity, impact, and focus on health equity, partnership development, and capacity building through analysis of 22 in-depth interviews and review of Network documentation. RESULTS: Searching Scopus for multicenter publications among the CPCRN members from their time of Network engagement yielded 1,074 collaborative publications involving two or more members. Both the overall number and content breadth of multicenter publications increased over time as the Network matured. Since 2004, members submitted 123 multicenter grant applications, of which 72 were funded (59%), totaling more than $77 million secured. Thematic analysis of interviews revealed that the CPCRN's success-in terms of publication and grant productivity, as well as the breadth and depth of partnerships, subject matter expertise, and content area foci-is attributable to: (1) its people-the inclusion of members representing diverse content-area interests, multidisciplinary perspectives, and geographic contexts; (2) dedicated centralized structures and processes to enable and evaluate collaboration; and (3) focused attention to strategically adapting to change. CONCLUSION: CPCRN's history highlights organizational, strategic, and practical lessons learned over two decades to optimize Network collaboration for enhanced collective impact in cancer prevention and control. These insights may be useful to others seeking to leverage collaborative networks to address public health problems.

Measuring and addressing health equity: an assessment of cancer center designation requirements.

PURPOSE: By requiring specific measures, cancer endorsements (e.g., accreditations, designations, certifications) promote high-quality cancer care. While 'quality' is the defining feature, less is known about how these endorsements consider equity. Given the inequities in access to high-quality cancer care, we assessed the extent to which equity structures, processes, and outcomes were required for cancer center endorsements. METHODS: We performed a content analysis of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, and research hospital endorsements from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), American Society of Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer (CoC), and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), respectively. We analyzed requirements for equity-focused content and compared how each endorsing body included equity as a requirement along three axes: structures, processes, and outcomes. RESULTS: ASCO guidelines centered on processes assessing financial, health literacy, and psychosocial barriers to care. ASTRO guidelines related to language needs and processes to address financial barriers. CoC equity-related guidelines focused on processes addressing financial and psychosocial concerns of survivors, and hospital-identified barriers to care. NCI guidelines considered equity related to cancer disparities research, inclusion of diverse groups in outreach and clinical trials, and diversification of investigators. None of the guidelines explicitly required measures of equitable care delivery or outcomes beyond clinical trial enrollment. CONCLUSION: Overall, equity requirements were limited. Leveraging the influence and infrastructure of cancer quality endorsements could enhance progress toward achieving cancer care equity. We recommend that endorsing organizations 1) require cancer centers to implement processes for measuring and tracking health equity outcomes and 2) engage diverse community stakeholders to develop strategies for addressing discrimination.

Prioritizing rural populations in state comprehensive cancer control plans: a qualitative assessment.

PURPOSE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) requires that states develop comprehensive cancer control (CCC) plans and recommends that disparities related to rural residence are addressed in these plans. The objective of this study was to explore rural partner engagement and describe effective strategies for incorporating a rural focus in CCC plans. METHODS: States were selected for inclusion using stratified sampling based on state rurality and region. State cancer control leaders were interviewed about facilitators and barriers to engaging rural partners and strategies for prioritizing rural populations. Content analysis was conducted to identify themes across states. RESULTS: Interviews (n = 30) revealed themes in three domains related to rural inclusion in CCC plans. The first domain (barriers) included (1) designing CCC plans to be broad, (2) defining "rural populations," and (3) geographic distance. The second domain (successful strategies) included (1) collaborating with rural healthcare systems, (2) recruiting rural constituents, (3) leveraging rural community-academic partnerships, and (4) working jointly with Native nations. The third domain (strategies for future plan development) included (1) building relationships with rural communities, (2) engaging rural constituents in planning, (3) developing a better understanding of rural needs, and (4) considering resources for addressing rural disparities. CONCLUSION: Significant relationship building with rural communities, resource provision, and successful strategies used by others may improve inclusion of rural needs in state comprehensive cancer control plans and ultimately help plan developers directly address rural cancer health disparities.

Challenges and opportunities in creating a deprescribing program in the emergency department: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: As the population of older adults increases, appropriate deprescribing becomes increasingly important for emergency geriatric care. Older adults represent the sickest patients with chronic medical conditions, and they are often exposed to high-risk medications. We need to provide an evidence-based, standardized deprescribing program in the acute care setting, yet the evidence base is lacking and standardized medication programs are needed. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study with the goal to understand the perspective of healthcare workers, patients, and caregivers on deprescribing high-risk medications in the context of emergency care practices, provider preferences, and practice variability, along with the facilitators and barriers to an effective deprescribing program in the emergency department (ED). To ensure rich, contextual data, the study utilized two qualitative methods: (1) a focus group with physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, pharmacists, and geriatricians involved in care of older adults and their prescriptions in the acute care setting; (2) semi-structured interviews with patients and caregivers involved in treatment and emergency care. Transcriptions were coded using thematic content analysis, and the principal investigator (S.L.) and trained research staff categorized each code into themes. RESULTS: Data collection from a focus group with healthcare workers (n = 8) and semi-structured interviews with patients and caregivers (n = 20) provided evidence of a potentially promising ED medication program, aligned with the vision of comprehensive care of older adults, that can be used to evaluate practices and develop interventions. We identified four themes: (1) Challenges in medication history taking, (2) missed opportunities in identifying high-risk medications, (3) facilitators and barriers to deprescribing recommendations, and (4) how to coordinate deprescribing recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Our focus group and semi-structured interviews resulted in a framework for an ED medication program to screen, identify, and deprescribe high-risk medications for older adults and coordinate their care with primary care providers.

Cardiac Adverse Events Associated With Chemo-Radiation Versus Chemotherapy for Resectable Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Study.

Background We compared cardiac outcomes for surgery-eligible patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer treated adjuvantly or neoadjuvantly with chemotherapy versus chemo-radiation therapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. Methods and Results Patients were age 66+, had stage IIIA/B resectable non-small-cell lung cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2015, and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemo-radiation within 121 days of diagnosis. Patients having chemo-radiation and chemotherapy only were propensity-score matched and followed from day 121 to first cardiac outcome, noncardiac death, radiation initiation by patients who received chemotherapy only, fee-for-service enrollment interruption, or December 31, 2016. Cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and competing risks subdistribution HRs were estimated. The primary outcome was the first of these severe cardiac events: acute myocardial infarction, other hospitalized ischemic heart disease, hospitalized heart failure, percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass graft, cardiac death, or urgent/inpatient care for pericardial disease, conduction abnormality, valve disorder, or ischemic heart disease. With median follow-up of 13 months, 70 of 682 patients who received chemo-radiation (10.26%) and 43 of 682 matched patients who received chemotherapy only (6.30%) developed a severe cardiac event (P=0.008) with median time to first event 5.45 months. Chemo-radiation increased the rate of severe cardiac events (cause-specific HR: 1.62 [95% CI, 1.11-2.37] and subdistribution HR: 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97-2.04]). Cancer severity appeared greater among patients who received chemo-radiation (noncardiac death cause-specific HR, 2.53 [95% CI, 1.93-3.33] and subdistribution HR, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.90-3.33]). Conclusions Adding radiation therapy to chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of severe cardiac events among patients with resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer for whom survival benefit of radiation therapy is unclear.

Engagement in Primary Prevention Program among Rural Veterans With Osteoporosis Risk.

A primary osteoporosis prevention program using a virtual bone health team (BHT) was implemented to comanage the care of rural veterans in the Mountain West region of the United States. The BHT identified, screened, and treated rural veterans at risk for osteoporosis using telephone and United States Postal Service communications. Eligibility was determined by regular use of Veterans Health Administration primary care, age 50 or older, and evidence of fracture risk. This study was conducted to identify demographic and clinical factors associated with the acceptance of osteoporosis screening and the initiation of medication where indicated. A cross-sectional cohort design (N = 6985) was utilized with a generalized estimating equation and logit link function to account for facility-level clustering. Fully saturated and reduced models were fitted using backward selection. Less than a quarter of eligible veterans enrolled in BHT's program and completed screening. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of clinic enrollment included being of older age, unmarried, greater distance from VHA services, having a copayment, prior fracture, or history of rheumatoid arthritis. A majority of veterans with treatment indication started medication therapy (N = 453). In this subpopulation, Fisher's exact test showed a significant association between osteoporosis treatment uptake and a history of two or more falls in the prior year, self-reported parental history of fracture, current smoking, and weight-bearing exercise. The BHT was designed to reduce barriers to screening; however, for this population cost and travel continue to limit engagement. The remarkable rate of medication initiation notwithstanding, low enrollment reduces the impact of this primary prevention program, and findings pertaining to fracture, smoking, and exercise imply that health beliefs are an important contributing factor. Efforts to identify and address barriers to osteoporosis screening and treatment, such as clinical factors, social determinants of health, and health beliefs, may pave the way for effective implementation of population bone health care delivery systems. Published 2022. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Consequences of Structural Urbanism: Urban-Rural Differences in Cancer Patients' Use and Perceived Importance of Supportive Care Services from a 2017-2018 Midwestern Survey.

BACKGROUND: Structural inequities, in part, undergird urban-rural differences in cancer care. The current study aims to understand the potential consequences of structural inequities on rural and urban cancer patients' access to and perceived importance of supportive cancer care resources. METHODS: We used data collected from November 2017 to May 2018 from a larger cross-sectional needs assessment about patients' support needs, use of services, and perceptions at a Midwestern United States cancer center. Oncology patients received a study packet during their outpatient clinic visit, and interested patients consented and completed the questionnaires. RESULTS: Among the sample of 326 patients, 27% of the sample was rural. In adjusted logistic regression models, rural patients were less likely to report using any secondary support services (15% vs. 27%; OR = 0.43, 95%CI [0.22, 0.85], p = 0.02) and less likely than urban counterparts to perceive secondary support services as very important (51% vs. 64%; OR = 0.57, 95%CI [0.33, 0.94], p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Structural inequities likely have implications on the reduced access to and importance of supportive care services observed for rural cancer patients. To eliminate persistent urban-rural disparities in cancer care, rural residents must have programs and policies that address cancer care and structural inequities.