Home Time Among Older Adults With Acute Myeloid Leukemia Following Chemotherapy.

Importance: Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) recognize days spent at home (home time) vs in a hospital or nursing facility as an important factor in treatment decision making. No study has adequately described home time among older adults with AML. Objective: To describe home time among older adults with AML (aged ≥66 years) and compare home time between 2 common treatments: anthracycline-based chemotherapy and hypomethylating agents (HMAs). Design, Setting, and Participants: A cohort of adults aged 66 years or older with a new diagnosis of AML from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database in 2004 to 2016 was identified. Individuals were stratified into anthracycline-based therapy, HMAs, or chemotherapy, not otherwise specified (NOS) using claims. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was home time, quantified by subtracting the total number of person-days spent in hospitals and nursing facilities from the number of person-days survived and dividing by total person-days. A weighted multinomial regression model with stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate adjusted home time was used. Results: The cohort included 7946 patients with AML: 2824 (35.5%) received anthracyclines, 2542 (32.0%) HMAs, and 2580 (32.5%) were classified as chemotherapy, NOS. Median (IQR) survival was 11.0 (5.0-27.0) months for those receiving anthracyclines and 8.0 (3.0-17.0) months for those receiving HMAs. Adjusted home time for all patients in the first year was 52.4%. Home time was highest among patients receiving HMAs (60.8%) followed by those receiving anthracyclines (51.9%). Despite having a shorter median survival, patients receiving HMAs had more total days at home and 33 more days at home in the first year on average than patients receiving anthracyclines (222 vs 189). Conclusions and Relevance: This retrospective study of older adults with AML using SEER-Medicare data and propensity score weighting suggests that the additional survival afforded by receiving anthracycline-based therapy was entirely offset by admission to the hospital or to nursing facilities.

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.

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.

Cancer Treatment Disparities in People With HIV in the United States, 2001-2019.

PURPOSE: People with HIV (PWH) have worse cancer outcomes, partially because of inequities in cancer treatment. We evaluated cancer treatment disparities among PWH, including an assessment of changes in disparities over time. METHODS: We used data from the HIV/AIDS Cancer Match Study, a population-based HIV and cancer registry linkage to examine diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and cancers of the cervix, lung, anus, prostate, colon, and female breast. Outcomes included receipt of (1) any cancer treatment and (2) standard therapy among patients with local-stage cancer. We assessed associations between HIV and each outcome by estimating adjusted prevalence odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CI and trends over time. We identified predictors of nonreceipt of cancer treatment in PWH. RESULTS: From 2001 to 2019, compared with people with cancer without HIV (n = 2,880,955), PWH (n = 16,334) were more likely to not receive cancer treatment for cervical cancer (aOR, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.52 to 2.70]), DLBCL (aOR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.38 to 1.70]), HL (aOR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.19 to 1.63]), lung cancer (aOR, 1.79 [95% CI, 1.65 to 1.93]), prostate cancer (aOR, 1.32 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.44]), colon cancer (aOR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.43 to 2.08]), and breast cancer (aOR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.07 to 1.77]). Similar associations were observed in PWH with local-stage cancers although no difference was observed for anal cancers. The association between HIV and nonreceipt of cancer treatment significantly decreased over time for breast, colon, and prostate cancers (all P trend <.0001), but PWH remained less likely to receive treatment in 2014-2019 for DLBCL, cervix, and lung cancers. Among PWH, Black individuals, people who inject drugs, and those 65 years and older were less likely to receive cancer treatment. CONCLUSION: Disparities in receipt of cancer treatment persist for PWH in the United States in contemporary time periods. Solutions to address inequitable receipt of cancer treatment among PWH are urgently needed.

Risk factors and health behaviors associated with loneliness among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Loneliness may exacerbate poor health outcomes particularly among cancer survivors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Little is known about the risk factors of loneliness among cancer survivors. We evaluated the risk factors of loneliness in the context of COVID-19 pandemic-related prevention behaviors and lifestyle/psychosocial factors among cancer survivors. Cancer survivors (n = 1471) seen at Huntsman Cancer Institute completed a survey between August-September 2020 evaluating health behaviors, medical care, and psychosocial factors including loneliness during COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were classified into two groups: 'lonely' (sometimes, usually, or always felt lonely in past month) and 'non-lonely' (never or rarely felt lonely in past month). 33% of cancer survivors reported feeling lonely in the past month. Multivariable logistic regression showed female sex, not living with a spouse/partner, poor health status, COVID-19 pandemic-associated lifestyle factors including increased alcohol consumption and marijuana/CBD oil use, and psychosocial stressors such as disruptions in daily life, less social interaction, and higher perceived stress and financial stress were associated with feeling lonely as compared to being non-lonely (all p < 0.05). A significant proportion of participants reported loneliness, which is a serious health risk among vulnerable populations, particularly cancer survivors. Modifiable risk factors such as unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and psychosocial stress were associated with loneliness. These results highlight the need to screen for unhealthy lifestyle factors and psychosocial stressors to identify cancer survivors at increased risk of loneliness and to develop effective management strategies.

Effectiveness of mRNA Booster Vaccine Against Coronavirus Disease 2019 Infection and Severe Outcomes Among Persons With and Without Immune Dysfunction: A Retrospective Cohort Study of National Electronic Medical Record Data in the United States.

Background: Real-world evidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) messenger RNA (mRNA) booster effectiveness among patients with immune dysfunction are limited. Methods: We included data from patients in the United States National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) who completed ≥2 doses of mRNA vaccination between 10 December 2020 and 27 May 2022. Immune dysfunction conditions included human immunodeficiency virus infection, solid organ or bone marrow transplant, autoimmune diseases, and cancer. We defined incident COVID-19 BTI as positive results from laboratory tests or diagnostic codes 14 days after at least 2 doses of mRNA vaccination; and severe COVID-19 BTI as hospitalization, invasive cardiopulmonary support, and/or death. We used propensity scores to match boosted versus nonboosted patients and evaluated hazards of incident and severe COVID-19 BTI using Cox regression after matching. Results: Among patients without immune dysfunction, the relative effectiveness of booster (3 doses) after 6 months from the primary (2 doses) vaccination against BTI ranged from 69% to 81% during the Delta-predominant period and from 33% to 39% during the Omicron-predominant period. Relative effectiveness against BTI was lower among patients with immune dysfunction but remained statistically significant in both periods. Boosted patients had lower risk of COVID-19-related hospitalization (hazard ratios [HR] ranged from 0.5 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .48-.53] to 0.63 [95% CI, .56-.70]), invasive cardiopulmonary support, or death (HRs ranged from 0.46 [95% CI, .41-.52] to 0.63 [95% CI, .50-.79]) during both periods. Conclusions: Booster vaccines remain effective against severe COVID-19 BTI throughout the Delta- and Omicron-predominant periods, regardless of patients' immune status.

The Intersections of COVID-19, HIV, and Race/Ethnicity: Machine Learning Methods to Identify and Model Risk Factors for Severe COVID-19 in a Large U.S. National Dataset.

We investigate risk factors for severe COVID-19 in persons living with HIV (PWH), including among racialized PWH, using the U.S. population-sampled National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) data released from January 1, 2020 to October 10, 2022. We defined severe COVID-19 as hospitalized with invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, discharge to hospice or death. We used machine learning methods to identify highly ranked, uncorrelated factors predicting severe COVID-19, and used multivariable logistic regression models to assess the associations of these variables with severe COVID-19 in several models, including race-stratified models. There were 3 241 627 individuals with incident COVID-19 cases and 81 549 (2.5%) with severe COVID-19, of which 17 445 incident COVID-19 and 1 020 (5.8%) severe cases were among PWH. The top highly ranked factors of severe COVID-19 were age, congestive heart failure (CHF), dementia, renal disease, sodium concentration, smoking status, and sex. Among PWH, age and sodium concentration were important predictors of COVID-19 severity, and the effect of sodium concentration was more pronounced in Hispanics (aOR 4.11 compared to aOR range: 1.47-1.88 for Black, White, and Other non-Hispanics). Dementia, CHF, and renal disease was associated with higher odds of severe COVID-19 among Black, Hispanic, and Other non-Hispanics PWH, respectively. Our findings suggest that the impact of factors, especially clinical comorbidities, predictive of severe COVID-19 among PWH varies by racialized groups, highlighting a need to account for race and comorbidity burden when assessing the risk of PWH developing severe COVID-19.

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.

Social and Demographic Influences of Trust in Cancer Information Among Brooklyn, New York Residents.

Little is known regarding the patterns of trust sources for cancer information among diverse populations in the US, which is particularly poignant during the current era of misinformation. Our objective to assess trust from different sources among a sample of Brooklyn, New York residents. Using data from the NCI funded Brooklyn Cancer Health Impact Program, we examined HINTS validated questions examining trust in cancer information across 9 sources. Logistic regression models were used to examine associations with cancer information trust sources. For trust in government health agencies, participants who had less than a college degree were almost 30% less likely to report high levels of trust (aOR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52-0.98), participants who reported a household income under $50,000 were 35% less likely report high levels of trust (aOR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89). Participants whose primary language was Spanish were significantly less likely to trust government (aOR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.29-0.70), newspapers and magazines (aOR: 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.84), and charitable organizations (aOR: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.31-0.75) compared to participants whose primary was English. New York is the most populous city in the US, a city of immigrants, and it is important for healthcare and public health professionals to explore how they can utilize media to provide accurate scientific evidence to combat cancer misinformation.

Cancer treatment delays among cancer patients living with HIV during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic led to care disruptions across the cancer continuum. It is unknown if immunosuppressed patients with cancer, who may be at higher risk for complications of SARS-CoV-2 infection, are disproportionately impacted. Thus, we aimed to compare delays in cancer treatment initiation between people living with HIV (PLWH) and cancer, the general cancer population (GCP), and patients with cancer and a history of solid organ transplant (SOT). Comparisons were made across the period 2 years preceding the pandemic versus the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: We used data from a real-world electronic health record-derived de-identified database (2018-2021) comprised of US patients with cancer from 800 sites of care across the country. We included patients with 19 different cancer types. We calculated time to cancer treatment initiation (TTI) as the difference between the date of cancer diagnosis and the earliest date that cancer treatment was recorded. RESULTS: The sample included 181 PLWH, 65,073 GCP patients, and 195 patients with a SOT. Difference-in-difference regression models adjusted for age, sex, and presence of metastatic disease at cancer diagnosis revealed a significant increase in delayed TTI among PLWH compared to the GCP during COVID-19 versus prior to COVID-19, with delays increasing by approximately 1 month during the pandemic (DID: 32.6 days [8.9-56.3]; p = 0.007). The increase in TTI for PLWH was observed across treatment modalities, including surgery (DID: 55.1 [28.8-81.3], p < 0.001) and systemic therapy (DID: 30.4 [4.6-56.3], p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS/RELEVANCE: PLWH experienced significant delays in cancer treatment initiation after diagnosis during the first year of COVID-19, delays that may negatively impact cancer outcomes. These data warrant patient and provider attention as the pandemic continues to impact the US healthcare system.

Regional Variation in HPV Knowledge and Awareness among American Indians and Alaska Natives: An Analysis of the Health Information National Trends Survey, 2011-2020.

BACKGROUND: American Indian and Alaskan Native (AIAN) people experience a disproportionately high incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers and mortality, and these rates vary across geographic regions. To address the unexplained regional differences among AIAN people, we describe regional variations and sociodemographic correlates of HPV-related knowledge and HPV vaccination awareness indicators. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was implemented with data for 866 AIAN respondents pooled from eight cycles of the Health Information National Trends Survey. We used χ2 tests to determine whether there were regional differences in the indicators and then used multivariable, modified Poisson regression to explore associations between sociodemographic characteristics and HPV-related knowledge and vaccination awareness measures. RESULTS: Of the 13 indicators, just one demonstrated regional variation. However, we observed a high level of uncertainty regarding HPV and HPV vaccine-related knowledge and experience. We also observed that women were more likely than men to have heard of HPV [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR), 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI):1.03-1.63], the HPV vaccine (aPR, 1.59; 95% CI: 1.15-2.22), and to have discussed it with their providers (aPR, 3.69; 95% CI: 1.47-9.28). There were also differences by age, education, and insurance status. CONCLUSIONS: High levels of uncertainty and lack of regional variation in indicators suggest that there may be missed opportunities across Indian Country for engagement between health care providers and AIAN in HPV-related conversations. IMPACT: Efforts toward improving HPV knowledge and vaccination should target all at-risk sexes (and genders), age groups, and education levels. Moreover, AIAN-serving health care providers should be empowered with sufficient understanding, so they are prepared for discussions with at-risk patients.

Lung cancer screening adherence among people living with and without HIV: An analysis of an integrated health system in Florida, United States (2012-2021).

Although lung cancer is a leading cause of death among people living with HIV (PLWH), limited research exists characterizing real-world lung cancer screening adherence among PLWH. Our objective was to compare low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) adherence among PLWH to those without HIV treated at one integrated health system. Using the University of Florida's Health Integrated Data Repository (01/01/2012-10/31/2021), we identified PLWH with at least one LDCT procedure, using Current Procedural Terminology codes(S8032/G0297/71271). Lung cancer screening adherence was defined as a second LDCT based on the Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS®). Lung-RADS categories were extracted from radiology reports using a natural language processing system. PLWH were matched with 4 randomly selected HIV-negative patients based on (+/- 1 year) age, Lung-RADS category, and calendar year. Seventy-three PLWH and 292 matched HIV-negative adults with at least one LDCT were identified. PLWH were more likely to be male (66% vs.52%,p < 0.04), non-Hispanic Black (53% vs.23%,p < 0.001), and live in an area of high poverty (45% vs.31%,p < 0.001). PLWH were more likely to be diagnosed with lung cancer after first LDCT (8% vs.0%,p < 0.001). Seventeen percent of HIV-negative and 12% of PLWH were adherent to LDCT screenings. Only 25% of PLWH diagnosed with category 4A were adherent compared to 44% of HIV-negative. On multivariable analyses, those with older age (66-80 vs.50-64 years) and with either Medicaid, charity-based, or other government insurance (vs. Medicare) were less likely to be adherent to LDCT screenings. PLWH may have poorer adherence to LDCT compared to their HIV-negative counterparts.

Lung Cancer Screening Adherence Among People with HIV Treated at an Integrated Health System in Florida.

We evaluated low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) adherence among people with HIV (PWH) treated at University of Florida (UF). From the UF Health Integrated Data Repository, we identified PWH who underwent at least one LDCT procedure (January 1, 2012-October 31, 2021). Lung cancer screening adherence was defined as having a second LDCT within recommended observation window, based on the Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS®). We identified 73 PWH with a history of at least one LDCT. PWH were mostly male (66%), non-Hispanic Black (53%), and living in urban (86%), high poverty (45%) areas. Almost 1 in 10 of PWH were diagnosed with lung cancer after their first LDCT. Overall, 48% and 41% of PWH were diagnosed with Lung-RADS categories 1 and 2, respectively. We observed that 12% of PWH were adherent to LDCT. Only 25% of PWH diagnosed with category 4A were adherent. PWH may have poor adherence to lung cancer screening.

Socioeconomic disparities in immunotherapy use among advanced-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients: analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Socioeconomic and racial disparities exist in access to care among patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in the United States. Immunotherapy is a widely established treatment modality for patients with advanced-stage NSCLC (aNSCLC). We examined associations of area-level socioeconomic status with receipt of immunotherapy for aNSCLC patients by race/ethnicity and cancer facility type (academic and non-academic). We used the National Cancer Database (2015-2016), and included patients aged 40-89 years who were diagnosed with stage III-IV NSCLC. Area-level income was defined as the median household income in the patient's zip code, and area-level education was defined as the proportion of adults aged ≥ 25 years in the patient's zip code without a high school degree. We calculated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using multi-level multivariable logistic regression. Among 100,298 aNSCLC patients, lower area-level education and income were associated with lower odds of immunotherapy treatment (education: aOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.65, 0.76 and income: aOR 0.71; 95% CI 0.66, 0.77). These associations persisted for NH-White patients. However, among NH-Black patients, we only observed an association with lower education (aOR 0.74; 95% CI 0.57, 0.97). Across all cancer facility types, lower education and income were associated with lower immunotherapy receipt among NH-White patients. However, among NH-Black patients, this association only persisted with education for patients treated at non-academic facilities (aOR 0.70; 95% CI 0.49, 0.99). In conclusion, aNSCLC patients residing in areas of lower educational and economic wealth were less likely to receive immunotherapy.

Mental health burdens among North American Asian adults living with chronic conditions: a systematic review.

Asians are likely to experience a high burden of chronic conditions, including, but not limited to, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer, due to differences in biologic, genetic, and environmental factors across Asian ethnic groups. A diagnosis of any chronic condition can contribute to increased mental health burdens, including depression, psychological distress, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, few studies have examined these comorbid conditions across distinct Asian ethnic groups-an important limitation given the differences in social, cultural, and behavioral drivers of mental health burdens within and across Asian ethnicities. To understand the disparities in mental health burdens among Asians living with a chronic health condition, we conducted a systematic literature review of relevant, peer-reviewed publication databases to identify studies reporting on mental health burdens (e.g., depression, anxiety, distress, PTSD) in distinct Asian ethnic groups in North America. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria for this review and collectively demonstrated a high burden of depression, psychological distress, and PTSD among Asians living with chronic conditions. Moreover, there were distinct disparities in mental health burdens across chronic conditions and across Asian ethnic groups. Despite the detrimental impact of poor mental health on chronic disease-specific outcomes, such as death and poor quality of life, few data exist that characterize mental health outcomes among Asian ethnicities living in North America with chronic conditions. Future work should prioritize estimating the national prevalence of mental health outcomes among adults with chronic conditions, by Asian ethnicities, to inform culturally tailored interventions to address this public health burden.

Financial toxicity among head and neck cancer patients and their caregivers: A cross-sectional pilot study.

Objectives: Head and neck cancer (HNC) patients experience greater financial toxicity than other cancer patients. Research on financial toxicity has concentrated on patients despite many informal caregivers sharing finances and reducing work hours to provide patient care. Thus, our pilot study: (1) assessed the feasibility of financial toxicity screening of HNC patients and their caregivers, and (2) described financial toxicity levels of HNC patients and their caregivers. Methods: We surveyed English-speaking adult HNC patients initiating treatment at a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center and their informal caregivers. This survey assessed demographics and financial toxicity through the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) measure (0-44 range; lower score indicates higher financial toxicity). Screening feasibility was defined as ≥50% consent rate and ≥60% data completion rate. Results: Our sample included 27 HNC patients and 9 caregivers. They both had slightly lower consent and completion rates than our goals. Patients reported a median COST score of 27 while caregivers reported a median COST score of 16. Approximately 25.9% of patients and 44.4% of caregivers reported high financial toxicity (COST < 17.5). Caregivers reported high concerns about their future financial health and their ability to control the amount of their financial contributions to the patient's care. Conclusions: Patients and caregivers may require additional outreach approaches beyond emailed questionnaires to screen for their financial toxicity systematically. Future research is needed to replicate our results to determine whether differences in financial toxicity occur between patients and caregivers and identify areas of focus for interventions. Level of evidence: IV.

Utilization of inpatient palliative care services among adolescents and young adults with cancer: Evidence from National Inpatient Sample 2016-2019.

OBJECTIVES: Palliative care can improve the quality of life of adolescents and young adults (AYA) with cancer. However, little is known about the utilization of palliative care among AYA cancer patients. Identifying factors associated with the utilization of palliative care could inform efforts to improve palliative care access among AYA patients living with cancer. METHODS: Using data from the National Inpatient Sample 2016-2019, a representative sample of US hospitalizations, we examined palliative care encounters and associated characteristics among hospitalizations of AYA with cancer and high inpatient mortality risk. Survey design-adjusted bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine associations of patient- and hospital-level characteristics with palliative care. RESULTS: Of 10,979 hospitalizations by AYA cancer patients with high mortality risk, 19.9% received palliative care services between 2016 and 2019. After adjusting for all characteristics, independent predictors of palliative care use were as follows: older age (25-39 years old vs. 25-39 years; odds ratio [OR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.49), Hispanic/Latinx (vs. non-Hispanic White; OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.34), female (vs. male; OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.14-1.41), public insurance (vs. private insurance; OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.38), hospital location in the US South (vs. Northeast; OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.94), and a large hospital (vs. small; OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.96). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Less than 20% of AYAs with cancer and high risk of mortality received inpatient palliative care services. Further research is needed to explore the reasons for lower palliative care utilization in the younger age groups.

Associations of HPV-16 Gene Methylation With Oral HPV-16 Persistence Among a Multinational Sample of Men.

ABSTRACT: Using data from the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Infection in Men cohort study, we demonstrate HPV-16 methylation associations with persistent oral HPV infection, the obligate precursor to oropharyngeal cancer. Human papillomavirus type 16 persistence was significantly associated with methylation of HPV-16 L2 CpG-4268 (Wilcoxon P = 0.04), and methylation of HPV-16 E2 CpG Pos 4 (Wilcoxon P = 0.04).

Implementing Digital Scribes to Reduce Electronic Health Record Documentation Burden Among Cancer Care Clinicians: A Mixed-Methods Pilot Study.

PURPOSE: To address shortcomings of human scribes (eg, turnover), clinicians are considering digital scribes (DSs). To our knowledge, to date, no study has assessed DS implementation or clinician user experience in cancer centers. We assessed the DS's feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, usability and its preliminary association on clinician well-being in a cancer center. We also identified implementation facilitators and barriers to DS use. METHODS: Using a mixed-methods longitudinal pilot study design, we implemented a DS at a cancer center. Data collection included surveys at baseline and 1 month after DS use and a semistructured interview with clinicians. The survey assessed demographics, Mini Z (workplace stress and burnout), sleep quality, and implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability, appropriateness, and usability). The interview assessed how the DS was used and its impacts on workflows and recommendations for future implementations of the DS. We used paired t tests to assess differences in Mini Z and sleep quality measures over time. RESULTS: Across nine survey responses and eight interviews, we found that although feasibility scores were slightly lower than our cutoff point (15.2 v 16.0), clinicians rated the DS as marginally acceptable (16.0) and appropriate (16.3). Usability was considered marginally usable (68.6 v 68.0). Although the DS did not significantly improve burnout (3.6 v 3.9, P = .081), it improved perceptions of having sufficient documentation time (2.1 v 3.6, P = .005). Clinicians identified suggestions for future implementations, including training needs and usability improvements. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary findings suggest that DS implementation is marginally acceptable, appropriate, and usable among cancer care clinicians. Individualized training and on-site support may improve implementation.

Identifying research practices toward achieving health equity principles within the Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network.

PURPOSE: Although there is national recognition for health equity-oriented research, there is limited guidance for researchers to engage partnerships that promote health equity in cancer research. The Cancer Prevention and Control Research Network's (CPCRN) Health Equity Work Group developed a toolkit to guide researchers in equitable collaborations. METHODS: The CPCRN's Health Equity Work Group collectively outlined health and racial equity principles guiding research collaborations with partners that include communities, community-based organizations, implementing partners in the clinical setting including providers and health care organizations, and policy makers. Using a network-wide survey to crowdsource information around ongoing practices, we leveraged and integrated the network's experience and collaborations. RESULTS: Data from the survey formed the preliminary basis for the toolkit, with a focus on sharing fiscal resources with partners, training and capacity building, collaborative decision-making, community-driven research agenda setting, and sustainability. The final toolkit provides reflection considerations for researchers and collated exemplary resources, supported by the contemporary research. CONCLUSIONS: The toolkit provides a guide to researchers at all experience levels wanting to engage in equitable research collaborations. Future efforts are underway to evaluate whether and how researchers within and outside CPCRN are able to incorporate these principles in research collaborations.