Electronic Health Record Nudges and Health Care Quality and Outcomes in Primary Care: A Systematic Review.

Importance: Nudges have been increasingly studied as a tool for facilitating behavior change and may represent a novel way to modify the electronic health record (EHR) to encourage evidence-based care. Objective: To evaluate the association between EHR nudges and health care outcomes in primary care settings and describe implementation facilitators and barriers. Evidence Review: On June 9, 2023, an electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Web of Science for all articles about clinician-facing EHR nudges. After reviewing titles, abstracts, and full texts, the present review was restricted to articles that used a randomized clinical trial (RCT) design, focused on primary care settings, and evaluated the association between EHR nudges and health care quality and patient outcome measures. Two reviewers abstracted the following elements: country, targeted clinician types, medical conditions studied, length of evaluation period, study design, sample size, intervention conditions, nudge mechanisms, implementation facilitators and barriers encountered, and major findings. The findings were qualitatively reported by type of health care quality and patient outcome and type of primary care condition targeted. The Risk of Bias 2.0 tool was adapted to evaluate the studies based on RCT design (cluster, parallel, crossover). Studies were scored from 0 to 5 points, with higher scores indicating lower risk of bias. Findings: Fifty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, most studies (79.6%) were assessed to have a moderate risk of bias. Most or all descriptive (eg, documentation patterns) (30 of 38) or patient-centeredness measures (4 of 4) had positive associations with EHR nudges. As for other measures of health care quality and patient outcomes, few had positive associations between EHR nudges and patient safety (4 of 12), effectiveness (19 of 48), efficiency (0 of 4), patient-reported outcomes (0 of 3), patient adherence (1 of 2), or clinical outcome measures (1 of 7). Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review found low- and moderate-quality evidence that suggested that EHR nudges were associated with improved descriptive measures (eg, documentation patterns). Meanwhile, it was unclear whether EHR nudges were associated with improvements in other areas of health care quality, such as effectiveness and patient safety outcomes. Future research is needed using longer evaluation periods, a broader range of primary care conditions, and in deimplementation contexts.

Patient-provider communication about the use of medical cannabis for cancer symptoms: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: There has been limited study regarding patient-provider communication about medical cannabis for cancer symptom management. To address this gap, this study assesses the determinants and prevalence of patient-provider communication about the use of medical cannabis for cancer symptoms at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. METHODS: Individuals who completed cancer treatment from July 2017 to December 2019 were invited to participate in a survey regarding medical cannabis. An electronic survey was administered in English and Spanish from August to November 2021 and completed by 1592 individuals (response rate = 17.6%). RESULTS: About one-third (33.5%) of participants reported discussing medical cannabis for cancer symptom management with a health-care provider. Controlling for other factors, individuals with malnutrition and/or cachexia had higher odds (odds ratio [OR] = 2.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.50 to 3.53) of reporting patient-provider discussions compared with individuals without malnutrition and/or cachexia. Similarly, individuals with nausea had higher odds (OR = 1.94, 95% CI = 1.44 to 2.61) of reporting patient-provider discussions compared with individuals without nausea. A smaller percentage (15.6%) of participants reported receiving a recommendation for medical cannabis for cancer symptom management. Among individuals who reported using cannabis, a little over one-third (36.1%) reported not receiving instructions from anyone on how to use cannabis or determine how much to take. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our study suggests that patient-provider communication about medical cannabis for cancer symptom management is limited. As interest and use of medical cannabis continues to grow among cancer patients, there is a need to ensure patients have access to high quality patient-provider communication.

Concurrent substance use among cancer patients with and without a history of cannabis use since cancer diagnosis at an NCI-Designated Cancer Center in Florida.

BACKGROUND: Although substance use may have adverse impacts on cancer outcomes, little is known regarding patterns of concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients. Our objective was to examine predictors of concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients since their cancer diagnosis and explore perceptions of cannabis among these patients. METHODS: Patients treated at a National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center were invited to participate in an electronic survey regarding medical cannabis from August to November 2021. Survey data were linked to internal data resources including electronic health records and patient intake forms to obtain history of substance use (defined as within at least 3 months of cancer diagnosis) of cigarettes, injection drugs, high levels of alcohol, or clinically unsupervised prescription drugs (total n = 1094). Concurrent substance users were defined as those with any reported substance use and cannabis use at the time of cancer diagnosis. We used descriptive statistics (χ2 or exact tests) to compare groups and estimated adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to identify predictors of substance use among users and nonusers of cannabis. RESULTS: Approximately 45% (n = 489) of the sample reported cannabis use since their cancer diagnosis. Of patients who reported using cannabis, 20% self-reported concurrent polysubstance use, while 8% of cannabis nonusers reported substance use (P < .001). Among patients who use cannabis, those who reported 2 or more self-reported treatment-related symptoms (eg, pain, fatigue) were more likely to have self-reported concurrent substance use (AOR = 3.15, 95% CI = 1.07 to 9.27) compared with those without any symptoms. Among nonusers, those with lower educational background were more likely to have a history of concurrent substance use (AOR = 3.74, 95% CI = 1.57 to 8.92). Patients who use cannabis with concurrent substance use were more likely to report improved sleep (P = .04), increased appetite (P = .03), and treatment of additional medical conditions (P = .04) as perceived benefits of cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS: High symptom burden may be associated with concurrent substance use with cannabis among cancer patients.

Leveraging real-world data to predict cancer cachexia stage, quality of life, and survival in a racially and ethnically diverse multi-institutional cohort of treatment-naïve patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Introduction: Cancer-associated cachexia (CC) is a progressive syndrome characterized by unintentional weight loss, muscle atrophy, fatigue, and poor outcomes that affects most patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The ability to identify and classify CC stage along its continuum early in the disease process is challenging but critical for management. Objectives: The main objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of CC stage overall and by sex and race and ethnicity among treatment-naïve PDAC cases using clinical, nutritional, and functional criteria. Secondary objectives included identifying the prevalence and predictors of higher symptom burden, supportive care needs, and quality of life (QoL), and examining their influence on overall survival (OS). Materials and methods: A population-based multi-institutional prospective cohort study of patients with PDAC was conducted between 2018 and 2021 by the Florida Pancreas Collaborative. Leveraging patient-reported data and laboratory values, participants were classified at baseline into four stages [non-cachexia (NCa), pre-cachexia (PCa), cachexia (Ca), and refractory cachexia (RCa)]. Multivariate regression, Kaplan Meier analyses, and Cox regression were conducted to evaluate associations. Results: CC stage was estimated for 309 PDAC cases (156 females, 153 males). The overall prevalence of NCa, PCa, Ca, and RCa was 12.9%, 24.6%, 54.1%, and 8.4%, respectively. CC prevalence across all CC stages was highest for males and racial and ethnic minorities. Criteria differentiated NCa cases from other groups, but did not distinguish PCa from Ca. The most frequently reported symptoms included weight loss, fatigue, pain, anxiety, and depression, with pain significantly worsening over time. The greatest supportive care needs included emotional and physical domains. Males, Black people, and those with RCa had the worst OS. Conclusions: Using clinical, nutritional, and functional criteria, nearly one-quarter of the PDAC cases in our diverse, multi-institutional cohort had PCa and 62.5% had Ca or RCa at the time of diagnosis. The PCa estimate is higher than that reported in prior studies. We recommend these criteria be used to aid in CC classification, monitoring, and management of all incident PDAC cases. Findings also highlight the recommendation for continued emotional support, assistance in alleviating pain, and supportive care needs throughout the PDAC treatment journey.

Cannabis use and patient-reported outcomes among patients at a comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: Patients with cancer report increasing rates of cannabis use, often to manage symptoms and toxicities. The efficacy and safety of cannabis, however, for some use cases remains unclear. To better understand characteristics of patients with cancer who report using cannabis, we examined data from a cannabis use survey of among patients with cancer seen at a National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center. METHODS: In late 2021, patients with cancer (N = 1608) treated between July 2017 and December 2019 provided cannabis use data. Additional data were obtained from medical records data and routine patient-reported outcomes collected for clinical purposes. Univariable analyses and multivariable regression analyses were conducted to identify correlates of cannabis use at different stages in the cancer care trajectory. RESULTS: Rates of self-reported cannabis use by patients with cancer were 59% before cancer diagnosis and 47% after diagnosis. Longitudinal rates of cannabis use were 29% for no cannabis use, 23% before diagnosis, 12% after diagnosis, and 35% for both before and after diagnosis. Demographic factors associated with cannabis use included age, sex, race, and educational achievement. Tobacco use and binge drinking were associated with higher odds of cannabis use. Cannabis use was also associated with greater self-reported interference with physical functioning due to pain and interference with social functioning due to health problems. CONCLUSIONS: We found high rates of cannabis use among patients with cancer, both before and after their cancer diagnosis. Future studies should further investigate psychosocial factors associated with cannabis use among patients with cancer as well as psychosocial outcomes among patients with cancer using cannabis.

Health Care Use Among Cancer Patients With Diabetes, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2017-2020.

Introduction: Diabetes is a common comorbidity among people with cancer. The objective of our study was to examine patterns of health care use among patients with cancer and either type 2 diabetes or prediabetes. Methods: We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) for 2017-2020. The study population included US adults aged 18 years or older who were diagnosed with any cancer and type 2 diabetes or prediabetes (established by self-report and/or hemoglobin A1c measurement). We used Poisson and multivariate logistic regression models to determine the effect of comorbidity on health care use, defined as health care visits and overnight stays in a hospital. Results: Of 905 cancer patients representing 27,180,715 people in the US, 24.4% had a type 2 diabetes diagnosis, and 25.8% had a prediabetes diagnosis. Patients with cancer and prediabetes had a significantly higher rate of health care visits (incidence rate ratio = 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.22; P = .03) than patients with cancer only. We found no significant association between having cancer and type 2 diabetes and the number of health care visits or overnight hospital stays compared with patients with cancer only. Conclusion: More emphasis should be placed on optimal care coordination among people with cancer and other conditions, such as diabetes and prediabetes, to reduce the impact of comorbidity on health care use. Interventions integrated with technology to provide timely access to education on preventing or managing diabetes and prediabetes among cancer patients are warranted.

The Efficacy of Ketamine for Acute and Chronic Pain in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Managing cancer-related pain poses significant challenges, prompting research into alternative approaches such as ketamine. This systematic review aims to analyze and summarize the impact of ketamine as an adjuvant to opioid therapy for cancer-related pain. We conducted a literature review in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus from 1 January 1982 to 20 October 2023. Abstracts were screened against inclusion criteria, and eligible studies underwent a full-text review. Data was extracted from the included studies, and a framework analysis approach summarized the evidence regarding ketamine's use in patients with cancer. A total of 21 randomized clinical trials were included, and the quality of all the included studies was good or fair. Significant improvements in pain scores and reduced morphine consumption were consistently observed with intravenous ketamine administration for postoperative pain control, particularly when combined with other analgesics such as morphine. Ketamine was less effective when used as an analgesic for chronic pain management, with several studies on neuropathic pain or chemotherapy-induced neuropathy finding minimal significant effect on reduction of pain scores or morphine requirements. The efficacy of ketamine in pain management appears to depend on factors such as dosage, route of administration, and patient population.

Assessing the Validity of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Measure in Identifying Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits by Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented chemotherapy measures (OP-35) to reduce potentially preventable emergency department visits (PPEDVs) and hospitalizations. This study evaluated the validity of the OP-35 measure in identifying PPEDVs among patients with cancer. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study, which used data from the 2012-2022 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey. ED visits are assessed and compared on the basis of three measures: immediacy using Emergency Severity Index (ESI), disposition (discharge v hospitalization), and OP-35 criteria. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2022, a weighted sample of 46,723,524 ED visits were made by patients with cancer. Among reported ESI cases, 25.2% (8,346,443) was high urgency. In addition, 30.3% (14,135,496) of ED visits among patients with cancer led to hospitalizations. Using the OP-35 measure, it was found that 20.85% (9,743,977) was PPEDVs. A 21.9% (10,232,102) discrepancy between discharge diagnosis (CMS billing codes) and chief complaints was identified. Further analysis showed that 19.2% (1,872,556) of potentially preventable ED visits (CMS OP-35) were high urgency and 32.6% (3,181,280) resulted in hospitalization. CONCLUSION: The CMS approach to identifying PPEDVs has limitations. First, it may overcount preventable visits by including high-urgency or hospitalization-requiring cases. Second, relying on final diagnoses for retrospective preventability judgment can be misleading as they may not reflect the initial reason for the visit. In addition, differentiating causes for ED visits in patients with cancer undergoing various treatments is challenging as the approach does not distinguish between chemotherapy-related complications and others. Identification inconsistencies arise because of varying coding practices and chosen preventable conditions, lacking consensus and alignment with specific hospital or patient needs. Finally, the model fails to consider crucial nonclinical factors like social support, economic barriers, and alternative care access, potentially unfairly penalizing hospitals serving underserved populations.

Feasibility of a Smartphone Application for Education and Symptom Management of Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma on Combined Tyrosine Kinase and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) face significant challenges, stemming both from the complexities of the disease itself and the adverse effects of treatments. This study evaluated the feasibility and acceptability of a mobile health (mHealth) application tailored for education and symptom management of patients with advanced RCC receiving combined immune checkpoint inhibitor and tyrosine kinase inhibitor (ICI-TKI) therapy. METHODS: The primary end points were acceptability and feasibility. Acceptability was defined as the proportion of patients approached who consented to participate, setting a benchmark of at least 50% for this metric. Feasibility was gauged by the completion rate of the intervention among the participants; it required at least 50% of participants to fully complete the intervention and at least 70% to finish half of the administered questionnaires. The secondary end points included knowledge assessment and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs were evaluated using validated instruments. To discern the changes between pre- and post-educational module quiz scores, we used the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Time-course data of PROs were visualized using line plots and then compared using paired t-tests. RESULTS: From November 2022 to July 2023, 20 of 22 (90%) patients approached for the study consented and enrolled. Of the enrolled patients, 60% completed all questionnaires and knowledge assessments at every time point and 75% completed at least half of the surveys and questionnaires. Significant pre/post differences were noted in two of six quizzes in the knowledge assessment. This study population did not experience a significant change in PRO scores after starting therapy. CONCLUSION: The mHealth application designed for education and symptom management in patients with advanced RCC undergoing combination ICI-TKI has proven to be both acceptable and feasible, meeting previous research benchmarks.

Characteristics of Patients With Cancer and COVID-19 Who Discontinued Cancer Treatment.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the prevalence of and characteristics associated with discontinuation of cancer treatment among patients who received a diagnosis of COVID-19 during their treatment planning.

Suicide Risk Screening for Head and Neck Cancer Patients: An Implementation Study.

OBJECTIVES: There is limited research on suicide risk screening (SRS) among head and neck cancer (HNC) patients, a population at increased risk for suicide. To address this gap, this single-site mixed methods study assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about the feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of an electronic SRS program that was implemented as a part of routine care for HNC patients. METHODS: Staff who assisted with SRS implementation completed (e.g., nurses, medical assistants, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers) a one-time survey (N = 29) and interview (N = 25). Quantitative outcomes were assessed using previously validated feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness measures. Additional qualitative data were collected to provide context for interpreting the scores. RESULTS: Nurses and medical assistants, who were directly responsible for implementing SRS, reported low feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness, compared with other team members (e.g., physicians, social workers, advanced practice providers). Team members identified potential improvements needed to optimize SRS, such as hiring additional staff, improving staff training, providing different modalities for screening completion among individuals with disabilities, and revising the patient-reported outcomes to improve suicide risk prediction. CONCLUSION: Staff perspectives about implementing SRS as a part of routine cancer care for HNC patients varied widely. Before screening can be implemented on a larger scale for HNC and other cancer patients, additional implementation strategies may be needed that optimize workflow and reduce staff burden, such as staff training, multiple modalities for completion, and refined tools for identifying which patients are at greatest risk for suicide.

HPV Multilevel Intervention Strategies Targeting Immunization in Community Settings (HPV MISTICS): Study protocol for a hybrid 1 stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This protocol paper describes the overall design for HPV MISTICS, a multilevel intervention to increase human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination initiation and completion rates among adolescents aged 11-17. METHODS: We will conduct a hybrid type 1 implementation-effectiveness trial using a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in eight federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Florida. Intervention components target three levels: system, providers, and parents. Outcomes will be assessed using quantitative (e.g., vaccination data, survey data) and qualitative methods (e.g., staff and parent interviews). We expect to quantify changes in HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates for adolescents ages 11-17 in the eight FQHCs. We have hypothesized a 20-percentage point increase in HPV vaccine series initiation and a 10-percentage point increase in series completion. We also anticipate being able to explore factors at the system, provider, and patient levels as potential covariates. Implementation outcomes, barriers, and facilitators identified in the study will help characterize the implementation process and inform potential future intervention scale-up. RESULTS: The project is ongoing; effectiveness and implementation outcomes will be determined following project completion. CONCLUSIONS: Findings will provide evidence of an equity-informed research design and implementation procedures that could help improve HPV vaccination rates in similar health systems. CLINICAL TRIALS IDENTIFIER: NCT05677360 (date registered: 2022-12-22); https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05677360?lead=Moffitt%20Cancer%20Center%20&aggFilters=status:rec&page=2&rank=17.

Racial and Ethnic Inequities in Cancer Care Continuity During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Those With SARS-CoV-2.

Importance: Racially and ethnically minoritized US adults were disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and experience poorer cancer outcomes, including inequities in cancer treatment delivery. Objective: To evaluate racial and ethnic disparities in cancer treatment delays and discontinuations (TDDs) among patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 during different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the American Society of Clinical Oncology Survey on COVID-19 in Oncology Registry (data collected from April 2020 to September 2022), including patients with cancer also diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 during their care at 69 US practices. Racial and ethnic differences were examined during 5 different waves of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States based on case surge (before July 2020, July to November 2020, December 2020 to March 2021, April 2021 to February 2022, and March to September 2022). Exposures: Race and ethnicity. Main Outcomes and Measures: TDD was defined as any cancer treatment postponed more than 2 weeks or cancelled with no plans to reschedule. To evaluate TDD associations with race and ethnicity, adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) were estimated using multivariable Poisson regression, accounting for nonindependence of patients within clinics, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, comorbidities, cancer type, cancer extent, and SARS-CoV-2 severity (severe defined as death, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, or mechanical ventilation). Results: A total of 4054 patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2 were included (143 [3.5%] American Indian or Alaska Native, 176 [4.3%] Asian, 517 [12.8%] Black or African American, 469 [11.6%] Hispanic or Latinx, and 2747 [67.8%] White; 2403 [59.3%] female; 1419 [35.1%] aged 50-64 years; 1928 [47.7%] aged ≥65 years). The analysis focused on patients scheduled (at SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis) to receive drug-based therapy (3682 [90.8%]), radiation therapy (382 [9.4%]), surgery (218 [5.4%]), or transplant (30 [0.7%]), of whom 1853 (45.7%) experienced TDD. Throughout the pandemic, differences in racial and ethnic inequities based on case surge with overall TDD decreased over time. In multivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (third wave: aPR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.31-1.85) and Hispanic or Latinx (third wave: aPR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.13-1.62) patients with cancer were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients during the first year of the pandemic. By 2022, non-Hispanic Asian patients (aPR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.12) were more likely to experience TDD compared with non-Hispanic White patients, and non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native patients were less likely (aPR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.16-0.89). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of patients with cancer and SARS-CoV-2, racial and ethnic inequities existed in TDD throughout the pandemic; however, the disproportionate burden among racially and ethnically minoritized patients with cancer varied across SARS-CoV-2 waves. These inequities may lead to downstream adverse impacts on cancer mortality among minoritized adults in the United States.

Association of food insecurity with overall and disease-specific mortality among cancer survivors in the US.

PURPOSE: To investigate the association of food insecurity with overall and disease-specific mortality among US cancer survivors. METHODS: Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 1999-2018) were used to examine the impact of food insecurity on mortality risks among cancer survivors in the US. Study participants aged ≥ 20 years who had a history of cancer and completed the Adult Food Security Survey Module were included. Mortality data [all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular (CVD) specific] through December 31, 2019 were obtained through linkage to the National Death Index. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, hazard ratios of mortality based on food security status were estimated. RESULTS: Among 5032 cancer survivors (mean age 62.5 years; 58.0% women; 86.2% non-Hispanic White), 596 (8.8%) reported food insecurity. Overall, 1913 deaths occurred (609 cancer deaths and 420 CVD deaths) during the median follow-up of 6.8 years. After adjusting for age, food insecurity was associated with a higher risk of overall (HR = 1.93; 95% CI = 1.56-2.39), CVD-specific (HR = 1.95; 95% CI = 1.24-3.05), and cancer-specific (HR = 1.70; 95% CI = 1.20-2.42) mortality (P < 0.001). However, after adjusting for socioeconomic characteristics and health-related factors (physical activity, diet quality measured by healthy eating index), the association between food insecurity and overall mortality was no longer statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Food insecurity was associated with a greater risk of overall mortality among cancer survivors. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate whether the observed association represents a causal phenomenon and, if so, whether the effect is modifiable with food assistance programs.

Support Through Remote Observation and Nutrition Guidance (STRONG), a digital health intervention to reduce malnutrition among pancreatic cancer patients: A study protocol for a pilot randomized controlled trial.

Background: Malnutrition is a common and distressing condition among pancreatic cancer patients. Fewer than a quarter of pancreatic cancer patients receive medical nutrition therapy (MNT), important for improving nutritional status, weight maintenance, quality of life and survival. System, provider, and patient level barriers limit access to MNT. We propose to examine the feasibility of a 12-week multi-level, digital health intervention designed to expand MNT access among pancreatic cancer patients. Methods: Individuals with advanced pancreatic cancer starting chemotherapy (N = 80) will be 1:1 randomized to the intervention or usual care. The Support Through Remote Observation and Nutrition Guidance (STRONG) intervention includes system-level (e.g., routine malnutrition and screening), provider-level (e.g., dietitian training and web-based dashboard), and patient-level strategies (e.g., individualized nutrition plan, self-monitoring of dietary intake via Fitbit, ongoing goal monitoring and feedback). Individuals receiving usual care will be referred to dietitians based on their oncologists' discretion. Study assessments will be completed at baseline, 4-, 8-, 12-, and 16-weeks. Results: Primary outcomes will be feasibility (e.g., recruitment, retention, assessment completion) and acceptability. We will collect additional implementation outcomes, such as intervention adherence, perceived usability, and feedback on intervention quality via an exit interview. We will collect preliminary data on outcomes that may be associated with the intervention including malnutrition, quality of life, treatment outcomes, and survival. Conclusion: This study will advance our knowledge on the feasibility of a digital health intervention to reduce malnutrition among individuals with advanced pancreatic cancer. Trial registration: NCT05675059, registered on December 9, 2022.

Mental healthcare access among US adults with vision impairment and depression and/or anxiety symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Although individuals with vision impairment are at greater risk for depression and anxiety, there has been limited study of mental healthcare utilization among this population. OBJECTIVES: To address this gap, this pooled cross-sectional study estimates the prevalence of mental healthcare utilization among individuals with vision impairment during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We calculated adjusted relative risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals of depression and/or anxiety symptoms and mental healthcare utilization using multinomial logistic regression, accounting for demographics, social determinants of health, and survey week. The population-based, U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey was administered April 2021-March 2022. Participants included 800,935 US adults (weighted population: 174,598,530) RESULTS: Adjusting for other factors, adults with vision impairment were more likely to report depression symptoms (RRR: 2.33; 95% CI: 2.03-2.68), anxiety symptoms (RRR: 2.12; 95% CI: 1.94-2.33, and comorbid depression and anxiety symptoms (RRR: 3.77; 95% CI: 3.51-4.04) compared with individuals with no vision impairment. Among individuals reporting anxiety or depression symptoms, individuals with vision impairment (RRR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.35-1.59) were more likely to lack of mental healthcare utilization compared with individuals with no vision impairment. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that individuals with vision impairment are at increased risk for depression and/or anxiety symptoms and report reduced mental healthcare utilization compared with individuals without vision impairment. Additional programs and policies are needed to improve mental healthcare utilization among individuals with vision impairment and depression and/or anxiety symptoms, such as increased telehealth accessibility and coordination of behavioral health and ophthalmology services.

Optimizing presurgical education for patients with head and neck cancer receiving laryngectomy and free flap surgery: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: There has been limited study of oncology professionals' perspectives on optimizing delivery of presurgical education for individuals with head and neck cancer (HNC). Therefore, we assessed oncology professionals' perspectives about presurgical education for laryngectomy and free flap surgeries, which have a significant impact on patients' quality of life. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 27 oncology professionals from an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center and a community oncology setting. RESULTS: Participants identified six recommendations to improve presurgical education: (1) establishing preoperative consultations with allied health professionals; (2) educating patients and providers on the concept of team-based care; (3) optimizing education through multimodal strategies; (4) connecting patients with other HNC surgical patients; (5) preparing caregivers for their role; and (6) educating patients on insurance navigation. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings demonstrate gaps in the timing, content, and mode of delivery for presurgical education and suggest strategies for further evaluation in future studies.

Racial and ethnic disparities in knowledge, attitudes, and invitation to participate in clinical trials among cancer survivors in the United States: An analysis of the 2020 U.S. HINTS.

Background: Despite the use of clinical trials to provide gold-standard evidence of cancer treatment and intervention effectiveness, racial/ethnic minorities are frequently underrepresented participants. Our objective was to evaluate racial/ethnic differences in knowledge and attitudes towards clinical trials among U.S. cancer survivors. Methods: We leveraged the 2020 Health Informational National Trends Survey (HINTS) data (February-June 2020), which is a weighted, nationally representative survey of 3865 adults (≥18 years), including cancer survivors. We descriptively evaluated cancer survivor's (n = 553) knowledge of clinical trials, and trusted sources of information regarding clinical trials. Using Poisson regression, we estimated predictors of self-reported knowledge of clinical trials. Results: Among cancer survivors, 82 % were NH-White and 60 % self-reported to at least have some knowledge about clinical trials. When asked about factors that would influence their decision to participate in clinical trials, participants across racial groups frequently chose "I would want to get better" and "If the standard care was not covered by my insurance." NH-White (76 %), NH-Black (78 %), and Hispanic/Latinx (77 %) cancer survivors reported their trusted source of information about clinical trials was their health care provider; NH-Asian cancer survivors reported their health care provider (51 %) as well as government health agencies (30 %) as trusted sources. Cancer survivors with only a high school degree were less likely to have any knowledge of clinical trials compared to those with a Baccalaureate degree or more (aPR:0.61;95 % CI:0.45-0.83). Conclusion: Health care providers are a trusted source of clinical trial information.

The efficacy and safety of ketamine for depression in patients with cancer: A systematic review.

Background: Management of depression in the oncology population includes supportive psychotherapeutic interventions with or without psychotropic medication, which take time to demonstrate effectiveness. Fast-acting interventions, like ketamine, can provide a rapid antidepressant effect; however, there has been limited research on effects of ketamine among cancer patients. The objective of this review is to provide an overview of research on the efficacy and safety of ketamine on depression in patients with cancer. Methods: We reviewed the published literature in MEDLINE® (via PubMed®), EMBASE, and Scopus from 1 January 1982 to 20 October 2022. We screened the retrieved abstracts against inclusion criteria and conducted a full-text review of eligible studies. Following extraction of data from included studies, we used a framework analysis approach to summarize the evidence on using ketamine in patients with cancer. Results: All 5 included studies were randomized clinical trials conducted in inpatient settings in China. In all included studies ketamine was administered intravenously. Three studies used only racemic ketamine, and two studies used both S-ketamine and racemic ketamine. All included studies reported ketamine a tolerable and effective drug to control depression symptoms. Conclusion: Included studies showed administration of sub-anesthesia ketamine significantly improves postoperative depression among patients with cancer.