Financial Hardship Among Patients With Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer.

Importance: The degree of cancer patients' financial hardship is dynamic and can change over time. Objective: To assess longitudinal changes in financial hardship among patients with early-stage colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prospective longitudinal cohort study, English-speaking adult patients with a new diagnosis of stage I to III colorectal cancer being treated with curative intent at National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practices between May 2018 and July 2020 and who had not started chemotherapy and/or radiation were included. Data analysis was conducted from March to December 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patients completed surveys at baseline as well as at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after enrollment. Cost-related care nonadherence and material hardship, as adopted by Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, were measured. Factors associated with financial hardship were assessed using longitudinal multivariable logistic regression models with time interaction. Results: A total of 451 patients completed baseline questions, with 217 (48.1%) completing the 24-month follow-up. Mean (SD) age was 61.0 (12.0) years (210 [46.6%] female; 33 [7.3%] Black, 380 [84.3%] White, and 33 [7.3%] American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, multiracial, or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander individuals or those who did not report race or who had unknown race). Among 217 patients with data at baseline and 24 months, 19 (8.8%) reported cost-related care nonadherence at baseline vs 20 (9.2%) at 24 months (P = .84), and 125 (57.6%) reported material hardship at baseline vs 76 (35.0%) at 24 months (P < .001). In multivariable analysis, lower financial worry (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% CI, 0.87-0.93), higher education (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.15-0.77), and older age (OR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98) were associated with lower nonadherence. Receipt of chemotherapy was associated with higher material hardship (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.15-6.29), while lower financial worry was associated with lower material hardship (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80-0.96). Over 24 months, female sex was associated with lower nonadherence (OR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.85-0.96), while higher education was associated with higher nonadherence (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.03-1.17). Being employed was associated with lower material hardship (OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.78-0.93), while receipt of care at safety-net hospitals was associated with higher hardship (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01-1.17). Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with early-stage colorectal cancer, material hardship was more common than cost-related cancer care nonadherence and decreased over time, while nonadherence remained unchanged. Early and longitudinal financial screening and referral to intervention are recommended to mitigate financial hardship.

Patient and Provider Characteristics Associated with Receipt of Image-guided Interventions for Low Back Pain.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Low back pain commonly causes disability, often managed with conservative image-guided interventions before surgery. Research has documented racial disparities with these and other non-pharmacologic treatments. We posited that individual chart reviews may provide insight into the disparity of care types through documented patient/provider discussions and their effect on treatment plans. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective analysis involved adults newly diagnosed with low back pain within a large Utah healthcare system. The primary outcome was the association of provider and patient variables with the frequency of image-guided interventions received within one year of low back pain diagnosis between White/non-Hispanic and underrepresented minority cohorts. Secondary outcomes were receipt of additional treatment types (physical therapy and lumbar surgery), time to any treatment, time to image-guided intervention, and discussion/receipt of therapy between cohorts within one year of diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 812 subjects (59% White/non-Hispanic and 41% underrepresented minority), more White/non-Hispanic patients had at least one image-guided intervention within 12 months compared to underrepresented minority patients (7.2% vs. 12.5%, p = .001), despite underrepresented minorities having higher presenting pain scores (64.5% vs. 49.3%; pain intensity > 5, p = .001). Underrepresented minority patients more often saw generalists (71.7% vs. 52.6%, p < .001) and advanced practice clinician providers (33.6% vs. 25.6%, p < .02) compared to the White/non-Hispanic cohort. Both cohorts were referred to a specialist at the same rate (17.7% vs. 19.8%, p = .20); however, referral completion was noted less often (60.4% vs. 77.7%, p = .02) and took longer to complete in underrepresented minority patients (54 vs. 27.5; mean day, p = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Underrepresented minority patients had more severe low back pain on presentation but received image-guided interventions less often than White/non-Hispanic patients. While there may be systematic provider barriers, such as absence of a decision-making discussion, data do not support provider bias as a contributing factor to differences in receipt of image-guided interventions. Non-medical barriers to referral completion should be further investigated to improve access to more specialized low back pain care. ABBREVIATIONS: IGI = image-guided intervention; LBP = low back pain; URM = underrepresented minority; WNH = White/non-Hispanic; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient.

Financial Toxicity Screening Preferences in Patients With Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Financial toxicity is an important issue in cancer that affects quality of life and treatment adherence. Screening can identify patients at risk but consensus on appropriate timing or methods is lacking. METHODS: We sent an anonymous survey to e-mail subscribers of a nationwide breast cancer-specific philanthropic organization in July 2023 asking about financial toxicity screening preferences. Frequencies, percentages, and medians were calculated for categorical and continuous variables. RESULTS: Of 5,774 potential participants, 738 respondents with a confirmed cancer diagnosis participated (12.7% response rate). Participants were 93% female (n = 690), had a median age of 50 years (IQR, 44-57), were 57% non-Hispanic White (n = 418), 20% Black/African-American (n = 149), 9.2% Hispanic (n = 68). 93% confirmed a breast cancer diagnosis (n = 689), and 54% were currently undergoing treatment (n = 400). Most indicated not being asked about financial stressors by (58%, n = 425) and not receiving assistance from their care team (68%, n = 498). Most preferred for providers to reach out regarding financial needs (83%, n = 615). Most wished for these discussions to take place early (when first diagnosed [45%, n = 334] or when treatment selected [37%, n = 275]) and to be asked frequently (each appointment [42%, n = 312] or once per month [36%, n = 268]). Participants felt most comfortable discussing financial needs with a social worker or patient/financial navigator (92%, n = 679), in person (75%, n = 553), or via telephone (65%, n = 479). CONCLUSION: Patients in this sample primarily consisting of women with breast cancer desired financial screening to occur early, often, and to be initiated by their providers. Patient preferences can inform optimal implementation of financial toxicity screening practices. Continued work refining best practices for financial toxicity screening should incorporate these patient preferences.

Optimal Large Language Model Characteristics to Balance Accuracy and Energy Use for Sustainable Medical Applications.

Background Large language models (LLMs) for medical applications use unknown amounts of energy, which contribute to the overall carbon footprint of the health care system. Purpose To investigate the tradeoffs between accuracy and energy use when using different LLM types and sizes for medical applications. Materials and Methods This retrospective study evaluated five different billion (B)-parameter sizes of two open-source LLMs (Meta's Llama 2, a general-purpose model, and LMSYS Org's Vicuna 1.5, a specialized fine-tuned model) using chest radiograph reports from the National Library of Medicine's Indiana University Chest X-ray Collection. Reports with missing demographic information and missing or blank files were excluded. Models were run on local compute clusters with visual computing graphic processing units. A single-task prompt explained clinical terminology and instructed each model to confirm the presence or absence of each of the 13 CheXpert disease labels. Energy use (in kilowatt-hours) was measured using an open-source tool. Accuracy was assessed with 13 CheXpert reference standard labels for diagnostic findings on chest radiographs, where overall accuracy was the mean of individual accuracies of all 13 labels. Efficiency ratios (accuracy per kilowatt-hour) were calculated for each model type and size. Results A total of 3665 chest radiograph reports were evaluated. The Vicuna 1.5 7B and 13B models had higher efficiency ratios (737.28 and 331.40, respectively) and higher overall labeling accuracy (93.83% [3438.69 of 3665 reports] and 93.65% [3432.38 of 3665 reports], respectively) than that of the Llama 2 models (7B: efficiency ratio of 13.39, accuracy of 7.91% [289.76 of 3665 reports]; 13B: efficiency ratio of 40.90, accuracy of 74.08% [2715.15 of 3665 reports]; 70B: efficiency ratio of 22.30, accuracy of 92.70% [3397.38 of 3665 reports]). Vicuna 1.5 7B had the highest efficiency ratio (737.28 vs 13.39 for Llama 2 7B). The larger Llama 2 70B model used more than seven times the energy of its 7B counterpart (4.16 kWh vs 0.59 kWh) with low overall accuracy, resulting in an efficiency ratio of only 22.30. Conclusion Smaller fine-tuned LLMs were more sustainable than larger general-purpose LLMs, using less energy without compromising accuracy, highlighting the importance of LLM selection for medical applications. © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article.

Differential Access to Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared with Mammography and Ultrasound.

INTRODUCTION: For high-risk women, breast magnetic resonance (MR) is the preferred supplemental imaging option, but spatial access differences may exacerbate disparities in breast care. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study examining distance between ZIP codes and the nearest breast imaging facility (MR, mammography, ultrasound) using 2023 data from the Food and Drug Administration and the American College of Radiology. Linear regression was used to assess distance differences controlling for Area Deprivation Index (ADI), urbanicity, and population size. Analyses were conducted in 2024. RESULTS: Among the 29,629 ZIP codes with an ADI and known urbanicity, unadjusted mean distance to breast MR was 23.2±25.1 miles (SD) compared with 8.2±8.3 for mammography and 22.2±25.0 for ultrasound. Hence, the average distance to breast MR facilities was 2.8 times further than to mammography facilities. ADI and urbanicity were associated with increased distance to the nearest breast imaging facility. The additional miles associated with the least advantaged areas compared with most advantaged areas was 12.2 (95%CI: 11.3, 13.2) for MR, 11.5 miles (95%CI: 10.6, 12.3) for ultrasound, and 2.4 (95%CI: 2.1, 2.7) for mammography. Compared with metropolitan areas, the additional miles to breast MR facilities was 23.2 (95%CI: 22.5, 24.0) for small/rural areas. CONCLUSIONS: Spatial access is substantially better for mammography sites compared with breast MR or ultrasound sites. Given these findings, consideration of options to mitigate the impact of differential access should be considered. For example, mammography sites could offer contrast-enhanced mammography. Future research should examine the feasibility and effectiveness of this and other options.

Assessing the Correlation between Allostatic Load and False-Positive Image-Guided Breast Biopsies.

Background: Allostatic load (AL) is the accumulation of physiological dysregulation attributed to repeated activation of the stress response over a lifetime. We assessed the utility of AL as a prognostic measure for high-risk benign breast biopsy pathology results. Method: Eligible patients were women 18 years or older, with a false-positive outpatient breast biopsy between January and December 2022 at a tertiary academic health center. AL was calculated using 12 variables representing four physiological systems: cardiovascular (pulse rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, and low-density lipoprotein); metabolic (body mass index, albumin, and hemoglobin A1C); renal (creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate); and immune (white blood cell count). Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the association between AL before biopsy and breast biopsy outcomes controlling for patients' sociodemographics. Results: In total, 170 women were included (mean age, 54.1 ± 12.9 years): 89.4% had benign and 10.6% had high-risk pathologies (radial scar/complex sclerosing lesion, atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia, flat epithelial atypia, intraductal papilloma, or lobular carcinoma in-situ). A total of 56.5% were White, 24.7% Asian, and 17.1% other races. A total of 32.5% identified as Hispanic. The mean breast cancer risk score using the Tyrer-Cuzick model was 11.9 ± 7.0. In multivariable analysis, with every one unit increase in AL, the probability of high-risk pathology increased by 37% (odds ratio, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.03, 1.81; p = 0.03). No significant association was seen between high-risk pathology and age, ethnicity, breast cancer risk, or area deprivation index. Conclusion: Our findings support that increased AL, a biological marker of stress, is associated with high-risk pathology among patients with false-positive breast biopsy results.

Short-Term Out-of-Pocket and Total Costs of Care After Ablation, Resection, or Transplant for Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A National SEER-Medicare Cost Comparison.

BACKGROUND. Differences in survival and morbidity among treatment options (ablation, surgical resection, and transplant) for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) have been well studied. Additional understanding of the costs of such care would help to identify drivers of high costs and potential barriers to care delivery. OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article was to quantify total and patient out-of-pocket costs for ablation, surgical resection, and transplant in the management of early-stage HCC and to identify factors predictive of these costs. METHODS. This retrospective U.S. population-based study used the SEER-Medicare linked dataset to identify a sample of 1067 Medicare beneficiaries (mean age, 73 years; 674 men, 393 women) diagnosed with early-stage HCC (size ≤ 5 cm) treated with ablation (n = 623), resection (n = 201), or transplant (n = 243) between January 2009 and December 2016. Total costs and patient out-of-pocket costs for the index procedure as well as for any care within 30 and 90 days after the procedure were identified and stratified by treatment modality. Additional comparisons were performed among propensity score-matched subgroups of patients treated by ablation or resection (each n = 172). Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify factors predictive of total costs and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30- and 90-day post-procedure periods. RESULTS. For ablation, resection, and transplant, median index-procedure total cost was US$6689, US$25,614, and US$66,034; index-procedure out-of-pocket cost was US$1235, US$1650, and US$1317; 30-day total cost was US$9456, US$29,754, and US$69,856; 30-day out-of-pocket cost was US$1646, US$2208, and US$3198; 90-day total cost was US$14,572, US$34,984, and US$88,103; and 90-day out-of-pocket cost was US$2138, US$2462, and US$3876, respectively (all p < .001). In propensity score-matched subgroups, ablation and resection had median index-procedure, 30-day, and 90-day total costs of US$6690 and US$25,716, US$9995 and US$30,365, and US$15,851 and US$34,455, respectively. In multivariable analysis adjusting for socioeconomic factors, comorbidities, and liver-disease prognostic indicators, surgical treatment (resection or transplant) was predictive of significantly greater costs compared with ablation at all time points. CONCLUSION. Total and out-of-pocket costs for index procedures as well as for 30-day and 90-day postprocedure periods were lowest for ablation, followed by resection and then transplant. CLINICAL IMPACT. This comprehensive cost analysis could help inform future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Patient-Reported Adverse Events and Early Treatment Discontinuation Among Patients With Multiple Myeloma.

Importance: There is substantial interest in capturing cancer treatment tolerability from the patient's perspective using patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Objective: To examine whether a PRO question, item 5 from the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General General Physical Wellbeing Scale (GP5), was associated with early treatment discontinuation (ETD) due to adverse events. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective survey study was conducted from February to April 2023. Among participants in the ECOG-ACRIN E1A11 trial (a phase 3, parallel design trial conducted between 2013 and 2019), patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomized to receive bortezomib (VRd) or carfilzomib (KRd) plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone as induction therapy. The GP5 item was administered at baseline (pretreatment) and at 1 month, 2.8 months, and 5.5 months postbaseline. Eligible participants included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated at community oncology practices or academic medical centers in the US. Exposures: GP5 response options were "very much," "quite a bit," "somewhat," "a little bit," and "not at all." Responses at each assessment while undergoing treatment (1 month, 2.8 months, and 5.5 months) were categorized as high adverse event bother (ie, "very much," and "quite a bit") and low adverse event bother (ie, "somewhat," "a little bit," or "not at all"). In addition, change from baseline to each assessment while undergoing treatment was calculated and categorized as worsening by 1 response category and 2 or more response categories. Main Outcome and Measure: ETD due to adverse events (yes vs no) was analyzed using logistic regression adjusting for treatment group, performance status, gender, race, and disease stage. Results: Of the 1087 participants in the original trial, 1058 (mean [SD] age 64 [9] years; 531 receiving VrD [50.2%]; 527 receiving KRd [49.8%]) responded to item GP5 and were included in the secondary analysis. A small proportion (142 patients [13.4%]) discontinued treatment early due to AEs. For those with high adverse-effect bother, GP5 while undergoing treatment was associated with ETD at 1 month (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.20; 95% CI, 1.25-3.89), 2.8 months (aOR, 3.41; 95% CI, 2.01-5.80), and 5.5 months (aOR, 4.66; 95% CI, 1.69-12.83). Worsening by 2 or more response categories on the GP5 was associated with ETD at 2.8 months (aOR, 3.02; 95% CI, 1.64-5.54) and 5.5 months (aOR, 5.49; 95% CI, 1.45-20.76). Conclusions and Relevance: In this survey study of the E1A11 trial, worse GP5 response was associated with ETD. These findings suggest that simple assessment of adverse-effect bother while receiving treatment is an efficient way to indicate treatment tolerability and ETD risk.

Disparities in Provider Ordering Practices of Image-Guided Interventions and Surgery for Patients With Low Back Pain: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess individual- and neighborhood-level sociodemographic factors associating with providers' ordering of nonpharmacologic treatments for patients with low back pain (LBP), specifically physical therapy, image-guided interventions, and lumbar surgery. METHODS: Our cohort included all patients diagnosed with LBP from 2000 to 2017 in a statewide database of all hospitals and ambulatory surgical facilities within Utah. We compared sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of (1) patients with LBP who received any treatment with those who received none and (2) patients with LBP who received invasive LBP treatments with those who only received noninvasive LBP treatments using the Student's t test, Wilcoxon's rank-sum tests, and Pearson's χ2 tests, as applicable, and two separate multivariate logistic regression models: (1) to determine whether sociodemographic characteristics were risk factors for receiving any LBP treatments and (2) risk factors for receiving invasive LBP treatments. RESULTS: Individuals in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were less likely to receive any nonpharmacologic treatment orders (odds ratio [OR] 0.74 for most disadvantaged, P < .001) and received fewer invasive therapies (0.92, P = .018). Individual-level characteristics correlating with lower rates of treatment orders were female sex, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander race (OR 0.50, P < .001), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 0.77, P < .001), single or unmarried status (OR 0.69, P < .001), and no insurance or self-pay (OR 0.07, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Neighborhood and individual sociodemographic variables associated with treatment orders for LBP with Area Deprivation Index, sex, race or ethnicity, insurance, and marital status associating with receipt of any treatment, as well as more invasive image-guided interventions and surgery.

Patient-Reported Financial Burden of Treatment for Colon or Rectal Cancer.

Importance: The longitudinal experience of patients is critical to the development of interventions to identify and reduce financial hardship. Objective: To evaluate financial hardship over 12 months in patients with newly diagnosed colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing curative-intent therapy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, longitudinal cohort study was conducted between May 2018 and July 2020, with time points over 12 months. Participants included patients at National Cance Institute Community Oncology Research Program sites. Eligibility criteria included age at least 18 years, newly diagnosed stage I to III CRC, not started chemotherapy and/or radiation, treated with curative intent, and able to speak English. Data were analyzed from December 2022 through April 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was financial hardship, measured using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST), which assesses the psychological domain of financial hardship (range, 0-44; higher score indicates better financial well-being). Participants completed 30-minute surveys (online or paper) at baseline and 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: A total of 450 participants (mean [SD] age, 61.0 [12.0] years; 240 [53.3%] male) completed the baseline survey; 33 participants (7.3%) were Black and 379 participants (84.2%) were White, and 14 participants (3.1%) identified as Hispanic or Latino and 424 participants (94.2%) identified as neither Hispanic nor Latino. There were 192 participants (42.7%) with an annual household income of $60 000 or greater. There was an improvement in financial hardship from diagnosis to 12 months of 0.3 (95% CI, 0.2 to 0.3) points per month (P < .001). Patients with better quality of life and greater self-efficacy had less financial toxicity. Each 1-unit increase in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (rapid version) score was associated with an increase of 0.7 (95% CI, 0.5 to 0.9) points in COST score (P < .001); each 1-unit increase in self-efficacy associated with an increase of 0.6 (95% CI, 0.2 to 1.0) points in COST score (P = .006). Patients who lived in areas with lower neighborhood socioeconomic status had greater financial toxicity. Neighborhood deprivation index was associated with a decrease of 0.3 (95% CI, -0.5 to -0.1) points in COST score (P = .009). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that interventions for financial toxicity in cancer care should focus on counseling to improve self-efficacy and mitigate financial worry and screening for these interventions should include patients at higher risk of financial burden.

Interventions addressing health-related social needs among patients with cancer.

Health-related social needs are prevalent among cancer patients; associated with substantial negative health consequences; and drive pervasive inequities in cancer incidence, severity, treatment choices and decisions, and outcomes. To address the lack of clinical trial evidence to guide health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients, the National Cancer Institute Cancer Care Delivery Research Steering Committee convened experts to participate in a clinical trials planning meeting with the goal of designing studies to screen for and address health-related social needs among cancer patients. In this commentary, we discuss the rationale for, and challenges of, designing and testing health-related social needs interventions in alignment with the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 5As framework. Evidence for food, housing, utilities, interpersonal safety, and transportation health-related social needs interventions is analyzed. Evidence regarding health-related social needs and delivery of health-related social needs interventions differs in maturity and applicability to cancer context, with transportation problems having the most maturity and interpersonal safety the least. We offer practical recommendations for health-related social needs interventions among cancer patients and the caregivers, families, and friends who support their health-related social needs. Cross-cutting (ie, health-related social needs agnostic) recommendations include leveraging navigation (eg, people, technology) to identify, refer, and deliver health-related social needs interventions; addressing health-related social needs through multilevel interventions; and recognizing that health-related social needs are states, not traits, that fluctuate over time. Health-related social needs-specific interventions are recommended, and pros and cons of addressing more than one health-related social needs concurrently are characterized. Considerations for collaborating with community partners are highlighted. The need for careful planning, strong partners, and funding is stressed. Finally, we outline a future research agenda to address evidence gaps.

The effect of neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage on smoking status, quit attempts, and receipt of cessation support among adults with cancer: Results from nine ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group trials.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is associated with adverse outcomes among patients diagnosed with cancer. Socioeconomic determinants influence access and utilization of tobacco treatment; little is known about the relationship between neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage (NSD) and tobacco assessment, assistance, and cessation among patients diagnosed with cancer. METHODS: A modified Cancer Patient Tobacco Use Questionnaire (C-TUQ) was administered to patients enrolled in nine ECOG-ACRIN clinical trials. We examined associations of NSD with (1) smoking status, (2) receiving tobacco cessation assessment and support, and (3) cessation behaviors. NSD was classified by tertiles of the Area Deprivation Index. Associations between NSD and tobacco variables were evaluated using logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 740 patients completing the C-TUQ were 70% male, 94% White, 3% Hispanic, mean age 58.8 years. Cancer diagnoses included leukemia 263 (36%), lymphoma 141 (19%), prostate 131 (18%), breast 79 (11%), melanoma 69 (9%), myeloma 53 (7%), and head and neck 4 (0.5%). A total of 402 (54%) never smoked, 257 (35%) had formerly smoked, and 81 (11%) were currently smoking. Patients in high disadvantaged neighborhoods were approximately four times more likely to report current smoking (odds ratio [OR], 3.57; 95% CI, 1.69-7.54; p = .0009), and more likely to report being asked about smoking (OR, 4.24; 95% CI, 1.64-10.98; p = .0029), but less likely to report receiving counseling (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.02-0.58; p = .0086) versus those in the least disadvantaged neighborhoods. CONCLUSIONS: Greater neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage was associated with smoking but less cessation support. Increased cessation support in cancer care is needed, particularly for patients from disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Importance of Low- and Moderate-Grade Adverse Events in Patients' Treatment Experience and Treatment Discontinuation: An Analysis of the E1912 Trial.

PURPOSE: Despite defined grades of 1 to 5 for adverse events (AEs) on the basis of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events criteria, mild (G1) and moderate (G2) AEs are often not reported in phase III trials. This under-reporting may inhibit our ability to understand patient toxicity burden. We analyze the relationship between the grades of AEs experienced with patient side-effect bother and treatment discontinuation. METHODS: We analyzed a phase III Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network trial with comprehensive AE data. The Likert response Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-GP5 item, "I am bothered by side effects of treatment" was used to define side-effect bother. Bayesian mixed models were used to assess the impact of G1 and G2 AE counts on patient side-effect bother and treatment discontinuation. AEs were further analyzed on the basis of symptomatology (symptomatic or asymptomatic). The results are given as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% credible interval (CrI). RESULTS: Each additional G1 and G2 AEs experienced during a treatment cycle increased the odds of increased self-reported patient side-effect bother by 13% (95% CrI, 1.06 to 1.21) and 35% (95% CrI, 1.19 to 1.54), respectively. Furthermore, only AEs defined as symptomatic were associated with increased side-effect bother, with asymptomatic AEs showing no association regardless of grade. Count of G2 AEs increased the odds of treatment discontinuation by 59% (95% CrI, 1.32 to 1.95), with symptomatic G2 AEs showing a stronger association (OR, 1.75; 95% CrI, 1.28 to 2.39) relative to asymptomatic G2 AEs (OR, 1.45; 95% CrI, 1.12 to 1.89). CONCLUSION: Low- and moderate-grade AEs are related to increased odds of increased patient side-effect bother and treatment discontinuation, with symptomatic AEs demonstrating greater magnitude of association than asymptomatic. Our findings suggest that limiting AE capture to grade 3+ misses important contributors to treatment side-effect bother and discontinuation.

Economic and Environmental Costs of Cloud Technologies for Medical Imaging and Radiology Artificial Intelligence.

Radiology is on the verge of a technological revolution driven by artificial intelligence (including large language models), which requires robust computing and storage capabilities, often beyond the capacity of current non-cloud-based informatics systems. The cloud presents a potential solution for radiology, and we should weigh its economic and environmental implications. Recently, cloud technologies have become a cost-effective strategy by providing necessary infrastructure while reducing expenditures associated with hardware ownership, maintenance, and upgrades. Simultaneously, given the optimized energy consumption in modern cloud data centers, this transition is expected to reduce the environmental footprint of radiologic operations. The path to cloud integration comes with its own challenges, and radiology informatics leaders must consider elements such as cloud architectural choices, pricing, data security, uptime service agreements, user training and support, and broader interoperability. With the increasing importance of data-driven tools in radiology, understanding and navigating the cloud landscape will be essential for the future of radiology and its various stakeholders.

Feasibility of Screening for Financial Hardship and Health-Related Social Needs at Radiology Encounters.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the prevalence of financial hardship and health-related social needs (HRSNs) among outpatients undergoing advanced imaging services and assess the feasibility of screening for financial and social needs during radiology encounters. METHODS: Adult patients receiving CT, MRI, or PET/CT at outpatient imaging centers of an academic tertiary center were asked to complete a 15-minute survey with adapted validated questions inquiring about their experience of financial hardship related to imaging and HRSNs, and the appropriateness of screening for financial and social needs at radiology encounters. Logistic regression analyses were performed to assess factors associated with perceived appropriateness of screening and level of interest in meeting with financial counselors. RESULTS: A total of 430 patients responded (10.0% response rate; mean age: 57.1 years; 57.4% female; 54.5% White; 22.1% Hispanic; 19.1% Asian; 1% Black). A total of 35% reported experiencing financial hardship with imaging; 47.5% reported material hardship, 15.3% reported cost-related care nonadherence, and 5.3% reported cost-related imaging nonadherence. Overall, 35.9% had at least one HRSN, with food insecurity being the most common (28.3%). The majority (79.7%) felt that being screened for HRSNs at radiology encounters is appropriate, with those experiencing imaging hardship being more likely to feel that screening is appropriate (odds ratio [OR]: 2.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-6.56). Overall, 29.5% were interested in meeting with a financial counselor, with those with imaging hardship (OR: 3.70; 95% CI, 1.96-6.97) and HRSNs (OR: 2.87; 95% CI, 1.32-6.24) and who felt uncomfortable with screening (OR: 2.83; 95% CI, 1.14-7.03) being more likely to be interested. DISCUSSION: Financial hardship and HRSNs are common among outpatients undergoing advanced imaging, with the majority reporting that getting screened at radiology encounters is appropriate.

The Implications of Racialized Economic Segregation and Allostatic Load on Mortality in Patients with Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the association between racialized economic segregation, allostatic load (AL), and all-cause mortality in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women aged 18+ years with stage I-III breast cancer diagnosed between 01/01/2012 and 31/12/2020 were identified in the Ohio State University cancer registry. Racialized economic segregation was measured at the census tract level using the index of concentration at the extremes (ICE). AL was calculated with biomarkers from the cardiac, metabolic, immune, and renal systems. High AL was defined as AL greater than the median. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses using restricted cubic splines examined the association between racialized economic segregation, AL, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Among 4296 patients, patients residing in neighborhoods with the highest racialized economic segregation (Q1 versus Q4) were more likely to be Black (25% versus 2.1%, p < 0.001) and have triple-negative breast cancer (18.2% versus 11.6%, p < 0.001). High versus low racialized economic segregation was associated with high AL [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.21-1.61] and worse all-cause mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.08-1.83]. In dose-response analyses, patients in lower segregated neighborhoods (relative to the 95th percentile) had lower odds of high AL, whereas patients in more segregated neighborhoods had a non-linear increase in the odds of high AL. DISCUSSION: Racialized economic segregation is associated with high AL and a greater risk of all-cause mortality in patients with breast cancer. Additional studies are needed to elucidate the causal pathways and mechanisms linking AL, neighborhood factors, and patient outcomes.

Advancing Health Equity in Lung Cancer Screening and the Role of Humanomics.

Identifying and managing lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer-specific mortality, depend on multiple medical and sociodemographic factors. Humanomics is a model that acknowledges that negative societal stressors from systemic inequity affect individual health by altering pro-inflammatory gene expression. The same factors which may predispose individuals to lung cancer may also obstruct equitably prompt diagnosis and treatment. Increasing lung cancer screening access can lessen disparities in outcomes among disproportionately affected communities. Here, the authors describe several individual, provider, and health system-level obstacles to lung cancer screening and offer actionable solutions to increase access.

The Impact of Downstream Procedures on Lung Cancer Screening Adherence.

OBJECTIVE: (1) Evaluate downstream procedures after lung cancer screening (LCS), including imaging and invasive procedures, in screened individuals without screen-detected lung cancer. (2) Determine the association between repeat LCS and downstream procedures and patient characteristics. METHODS: Individuals receiving LCS between January 1, 2015, and November 30, 2020, from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart Database were included. Individuals with lung cancer after LCS were excluded. We determined frequency and costs of downstream procedures after LCS, including diagnostic imaging (chest CT, PET, or CT using fluorine-18-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose imaging) and invasive procedures (bronchoscopy, needle biopsy, thoracic surgery). A generalized estimating equation was used to model repeat LCS as a function of downstream procedures and patient characteristics. The primary outcome was repeat screening within 1 year of index LCS, and a secondary analysis evaluated the outcome of repeat screening with 2 years of index LCS. RESULTS: In all, 23,640 individuals receiving 30,521 LCS examinations were included in the primary analysis; 17.7% of LCS examinations (5,414 of 30,521) prompted downstream testing, with chest CT within 4 months being most common (9.1%, 2,769 of 30,521). At multivariable analysis adjusted for patient characteristics, the occurrence of a downstream diagnostic imaging test or invasive procedure was associated with a decreased likelihood of repeat annual LCS (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.38, 0.34-0.44; adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 0.75, 0.63-0.90, respectively). DISCUSSION: Downstream imaging and invasive procedures after LCS are potential barriers to LCS adherence. Efforts to reduce false-positives at LCS and reduce patient costs from downstream procedures are likely necessary to ensure that downstream workup after LCS does not discourage screening adherence.