Association of platinum-based chemotherapy with live birth and infertility in female survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effect of platinum-based chemotherapy on live birth (LB) and infertility after cancer, in order to address a lack of treatment-specific fertility risks for female survivors of adolescent and young adult cancer, which limits counseling on fertility preservation decisions. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: US administrative database. PATIENTS: We identified incident breast, colorectal, and ovarian cancer cases in females aged 15-39 years who received platinum-based chemotherapy or no chemotherapy and matched them to females without cancer. INTERVENTION: Platinum-based chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We estimated the effect of chemotherapy on the incidence of LB and infertility after cancer, overall, and after accounting for competing events (recurrence, death, and sterilizing surgeries). RESULTS: There were 1,287 survivors in the chemotherapy group, 3,192 in the no chemotherapy group, and 34,147 women in the no cancer group, with a mean age of 33 years. Accounting for competing events, the overall 5-year LB incidence was lower in the chemotherapy group (3.9%) vs. the no chemotherapy group (6.4%). Adjusted relative risks vs. no chemotherapy and no cancer groups were 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-0.82) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.51-0.93), respectively. The overall 5-year infertility incidence was similar in the chemotherapy group (21.8%) compared with the no chemotherapy group (20.7%). The adjusted relative risks vs. no chemotherapy and no cancer groups were 1.05 (95% CI 0.97-1.15) and 1.42 (95% CI 1.31-1.53), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors treated with platinum-based chemotherapy experienced modestly increased adverse fertility outcomes. The estimated effects of platinum-based chemotherapy were affected by competing events, suggesting the importance of this analytic approach for interpretations that ultimately inform clinical fertility preservation decisions.

Prostate Cancer Screening Uptake in Transgender Women.

Importance: There is no consensus in prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening guidelines regarding transgender women despite their known prostate cancer risk. Objective: To identify factors associated with recent (within the last 2 years) PSA screening in transgender women compared with cisgender men. Design, Setting, and Participants: This case-control study used data from the 2018 and 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) surveys to characterize rates of PSA screening for prostate cancer within the past 2 years and multivariable logistic regressions to characterize factors associated with recent screening among transgender women. The BRFSS program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention annually surveys over 400 000 US adults on behavioral risk factors, chronic illnesses, and use of preventive services. Respondents to the BRFSS who were cisgender men or transgender women 40 years or older and who had complete PSA testing responses and no prostate cancer history were included; 313 transgender women and 138 937 cisgender men met inclusion criteria. Matching was performed by age, race and ethnicity, educational level, employment, annual income, survey year, and cost barriers to care. Data were collected on November 2, 2022, and analyzed from November 2, 2022, to December 3, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: Rates of and factors associated with recent PSA screening in transgender women. Results: Among the 1275 participants included in the matched cohort (255 transgender women and 1020 cisgender men; 570 [44.7%] aged 55-69 years), recent PSA screening rates among transgender women and cisgender men aged 55 to 69 were 22.2% (n = 26) and 36.3% (n = 165), respectively; among those 70 years and older, these rates were 41.8% (n = 26) and 40.2% (n = 98), respectively. In the matched cohort, transgender women had lower univariable odds of recent screening than cisgender men (odds ratio [OR], 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.92]; P = .02). In a hierarchical regression analysis adding time since the last primary care visit, effect size and significance were unchanged (OR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.42-0.87]; P = .007). After adding whether a clinician recommended a PSA test, there was no statistically significant difference in odds of screening between transgender women and cisgender men (OR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.45-1.27]; P = .21). The results were further attenuated when clinician-led discussions of PSA screening advantages and disadvantages were added (OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.47-1.31]; P = .32). In a multivariable logistic regression among transgender women, having a recommendation for PSA testing was the factor with the strongest association with recent screening (OR, 12.40 [95% CI, 4.47-37.80]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this case-control study of one of the largest cohorts of transgender women studied regarding PSA screening, the findings suggest that access to care or sociodemographic factors were not principal drivers of the screening differences between transgender women and cisgender men; rather, these data underscore the clinician's role in influencing PSA screening among transgender women.

Opioid tapering in older cancer survivors does not increase psychiatric or drug hospitalization rates.

BACKGROUND: Opioid tapering in the general population is linked to increases in hospitalizations or emergency department visits related to psychiatric or drug-related diagnoses. Cancer survivors represent a unique population with different opioid indications, prescription patterns, and more frequent follow-up care. This study sought to describe patterns of opioid tapering among older cancer survivors and to test the hypothesis of whether older cancer survivors face increased risks of adverse events with opioid tapering. METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Medicare-linked database, we identified 15 002 Medicare-beneficiary cancer survivors diagnosed between 2010 and 2017 prescribed opioids consistently for at least 6 months after their cancer diagnosis. Tapering was defined as a binary time-varying event occurring with any monthly oral morphine equivalent reduction of 15% or more from the previous month. Primary diagnostic billing codes associated with emergency room or hospital admissions were used for the composite endpoint of psychiatric- or drug-related event(s). RESULTS: There were 3.86 events per 100 patient-months, with 97.8% events being mental health emergencies, 1.91% events being overdose emergencies, and 0.25% involving both. Using a generalized estimating equation for repeated measure time-based analysis, opioid tapering was not statistically associated with acute events in the 3-month posttaper period (odds ratio [OR] = 1.02; P = .62) or at any point in the future (OR = 0.96; P = .46). CONCLUSIONS: Opioid tapering in older cancer survivors does not appear to be linked to a higher risk of acute psychiatric- or drug-related events, in contrast to prior research in the general population.

Comparison of Capture Rates of the National Cancer Database Across Race and Ethnicity.

Importance: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) is an invaluable and widely used resource for cancer research, but the current state of representation of different racial and ethnic groups compared with the United States Cancer Statistics (USCS) database is unknown. Objective: To examine whether Hispanic and American Indian or Alaska Native individuals have lower representation in the NCDB compared with the USCS database. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, retrospective cohort study assessed individuals diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2006, and January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2019, in the NCDB and USCS databases. Data analysis was performed from September 2022 to October 2023. Exposure: Time. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the absolute percentage change (APC) in capture rate across the study period. Results: The cohort included 5 175 007 individuals (0.50% American Indian or Alaska Native, 3.10% Asian or Pacific Islander, 12.01% Black, 6.58% Hispanic, and 77.81% White) who were diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer. Capture rates were the lowest for individuals who were Hispanic (40.83% in 2004-2006 and 54.75% in 2017-2019; P < .001) or American Indian or Alaska Native (20.72% in 2004-2006 and 41.41% in 2017-2019; P < .001). The APCs were positive for both racial categories across all 4 cancers. However, overall APCs for Hispanic individuals (13.92%) remained lower than the overall APCs of White individuals (22.23%; P < .001). The APCs were greater for American Indian or Alaska Native individuals than for White individuals for prostate (14.68% vs 11.57%) and breast (21.61% vs 17.90%) cancer (P < .001), but the APCs for American Indian or Alaska Native individuals were lower than for White individuals for lung cancer (24.54% vs 33.03%; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of individuals diagnosed with cancer in the NCDB, Hispanic and American Indian or Alaska Native individuals diagnosed with breast, colorectal, lung, and prostate cancer were undercaptured in the NCDB, but their representation improved over time. Increased study is needed to determine where these populations predominantly seek cancer care.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Light Adjustable Lens Compared to Monofocal Intraocular Lens in Cataract Surgery.

PURPOSE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the Light Adjustable Lens (LAL; RxSight) in comparison to a monofocal intraocular lens (IOL) for individuals undergoing cataract surgery in both eyes. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using a Markov model that simulated the patient outcomes and costs associated with undergoing cataract surgery with the LAL or monofocal IOL. Cost-effectiveness was determined using the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), a measure that quantifies the incremental cost in dollars per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. Treatments with the ICER below the willingness-to-pay threshold (WTP) of $50,000/QALY were considered cost-effective. The model was also evaluated for the impact of uncertainties in parameters using one-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the LAL is cost-effective compared to monofocal IOLs in patients undergoing cataract surgery, with ICERs of $9,792/QALY (health care perspective) and $10,072/QALY (societal perspective) both significantly below the WTP. The model was most sensitive to patient age, market cost of the LAL, and proportion of patients with residual astigmatism following cataract surgery. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that cataract surgeries in patients starting at age 65 years were cost-effective in 94% of the simulations at a WTP of $50,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: From both health care and societal perspectives, the study shows cataract surgeries performed with the LAL are cost-effective when compared to those performed with a monofocal IOL. More studies are needed to compare the LAL to other premium lenses that also provide patients with excellent visual outcomes at a higher cost. [J Refract Surg. 2023;39(11):777-782.].

Determining The Role Of Radiation Oncologist Demographic Factors On Segmentation Quality: Insights From A Crowd-Sourced Challenge Using Bayesian Estimation.

BACKGROUND: Medical image auto-segmentation is poised to revolutionize radiotherapy workflows. The quality of auto-segmentation training data, primarily derived from clinician observers, is of utmost importance. However, the factors influencing the quality of these clinician-derived segmentations have yet to be fully understood or quantified. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the role of common observer demographic variables on quantitative segmentation performance. METHODS: Organ at risk (OAR) and tumor volume segmentations provided by radiation oncologist observers from the Contouring Collaborative for Consensus in Radiation Oncology public dataset were utilized for this study. Segmentations were derived from five separate disease sites comprised of one patient case each: breast, sarcoma, head and neck (H&N), gynecologic (GYN), and gastrointestinal (GI). Segmentation quality was determined on a structure-by-structure basis by comparing the observer segmentations with an expert-derived consensus gold standard primarily using the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC); surface DSC was investigated as a secondary metric. Metrics were stratified into binary groups based on previously established structure-specific expert-derived interobserver variability (IOV) cutoffs. Generalized linear mixed-effects models using Markov chain Monte Carlo Bayesian estimation were used to investigate the association between demographic variables and the binarized segmentation quality for each disease site separately. Variables with a highest density interval excluding zero - loosely analogous to frequentist significance - were considered to substantially impact the outcome measure. RESULTS: After filtering by practicing radiation oncologists, 574, 110, 452, 112, and 48 structure observations remained for the breast, sarcoma, H&N, GYN, and GI cases, respectively. The median percentage of observations that crossed the expert DSC IOV cutoff when stratified by structure type was 55% and 31% for OARs and tumor volumes, respectively. Bayesian regression analysis revealed tumor category had a substantial negative impact on binarized DSC for the breast (coefficient mean ± standard deviation: -0.97 ± 0.20), sarcoma (-1.04 ± 0.54), H&N (-1.00 ± 0.24), and GI (-2.95 ± 0.98) cases. There were no clear recurring relationships between segmentation quality and demographic variables across the cases, with most variables demonstrating large standard deviations and wide highest density intervals. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights substantial uncertainty surrounding conventionally presumed factors influencing segmentation quality. Future studies should investigate additional demographic variables, more patients and imaging modalities, and alternative metrics of segmentation acceptability.

The disproportionate burden of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) in diverse older adults diagnosed with cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Older adults living with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) who are then diagnosed with cancer are an understudied population. While the role of cognitive impairment during and after cancer treatment have been well-studied, less is understood about patients who are living with ADRD and then develop cancer. The purpose of this study is to contribute evidence about our understanding of this vulnerable population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of a linked, representative family of databases of cancer registries and Medicare administrative claims that make up the SEER-Medicare database. Older adults ages 68 and older with a first primary cancer type: breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, oral, or prostate were eligible for inclusion (N = 337,932). Prevalence estimates of ADRD across cancer types and a 5% non-cancer comparison sample were compared by patient factors. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of patients who had an ADRD diagnosis anytime in the three years prior to their cancer diagnosis was 5.6%. Patients with ADRD were more likely to be female, older (over age 75), a racial/ethnic minority, single, with multiple chronic conditions, and a tumor diagnosed early (stage I) or were unstaged. Black patients with colorectal and oral cancer had the highest and second highest prevalence of ADRD compared to White patients (13.46% vs 7.95% and 12.64% vs 7.82% respectively, p < .0001). We observed the highest prevalence of ADRD among Black patients for breast (11.85%), cervical (11.98%), lung (8.41%), prostate (4.83), and the 5% sample (9.50%, p > .0001). DISCUSSION: The higher prevalence of ADRD among Black and Latine older adults with cancer not only aligns with the trend observed in our non-cancer comparison sample, but also, these findings demonstrate the compounded risk experienced by minoritized older adults over the life course. The greater than expected prevalence of patients with ADRD who go on to develop cancer demonstrates better assessment of cognition is urgently needed. Accurate identification of these vulnerable populations is critical to improve assessment, care coordination, and address inequities in screening and treatment planning.

Retrospective Review of Follow-up Strategies for Patients Receiving Palliative Radiotherapy.

CONTEXT: There is no current standard-of-care follow-up strategy for patients who receive palliative radiotherapy (PRT) for bone metastases. Within our institution there is currently a heterogenous practice in which some providers schedule routine follow up 1-3 months after initial PRT while others do follow up only as needed (PRN). OBJECTIVES: Our study aims to compare rates of retreatment based on follow-up strategies (planned vs. PRN), explore factors that potentially affect retreatment, and evaluate whether provider follow-up strategy correlates with measurable differences in quality of care. METHODS: In a retrospective chart review, PRT courses for bone metastases at our single institution were divided by follow-up strategies (planned vs. PRN). Demographic, clinical, and PRT data were collected and analyzed via descriptive statistics. The relationship between planned follow-up appointment and subsequent retreatment was studied. RESULTS: More patients received retreatment within one year of initial PRT in the planned follow-up group than in the PRN follow-up group (40.4% vs. 14.4%, p<0.001). Retreatment was achieved sooner in the planned follow-up group than in the PRN follow-up group (137 days vs. 156 days). When accounting for other variables, having a planned follow-up appointment remains the most important factor in establishing retreatment (OR = 3.32, 2.11-5.29, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Having a planned follow-up appointment after the initial course of PRT improves identification of patients who would benefit from additional treatment, thus improving patient experience and quality of care.

Low-Value Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening in Older Males.

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines advise against prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening for prostate cancer in males older than 69 years due to the risk of false-positive results and overdiagnosis of indolent disease. However, this low-value PSA screening in males aged 70 years or older remains common. Objective: To characterize the factors associated with low-value PSA screening in males 70 years or older. Design, Setting, and Participants: This survey study used data from the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a nationwide annual survey conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that collects information via telephone from more than 400 000 US adults on behavioral risk factors, chronic illnesses, and use of preventive services. The final cohort comprised male respondents to the 2020 BRFSS survey who were categorized into the following age groups: 70 to 74 years, 75 to 79 years, or 80 years or older. Males with a former or current prostate cancer diagnosis were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: The outcomes were recent PSA screening rates and factors associated with low-value PSA screening. Recent screening was defined as PSA testing within the past 2 years. Weighted multivariable logistic regressions and 2-sided significance tests were used to characterize factors associated with recent screening. Results: The cohort included 32 306 males. Most of these males (87.6%) were White individuals, whereas 1.1% were American Indian, 1.2% were Asian, 4.3% were Black, and 3.4% were Hispanic individuals. Within this cohort, 42.8% of respondents were aged 70 to 74 years, 28.4% were aged 75 to 79 years, and 28.9% were 80 years or older. The recent PSA screening rates were 55.3% for males in the 70-to-74-year age group, 52.1% in the 75-to-79-year age group, and 39.4% in the 80-year-or-older group. Among all racial groups, non-Hispanic White males had the highest screening rate (50.7%), and non-Hispanic American Indian males had the lowest screening rate (32.0%). Screening increased with higher educational level and annual income. Married respondents were screened more than unmarried males. In a multivariable regression model, discussing PSA testing advantages with a clinician (odds ratio [OR], 9.09; 95% CI, 7.60-11.40; P < .001) was associated with increased recent screening, whereas discussing PSA testing disadvantages had no association with screening (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.77-1.17; P = .60). Other factors associated with a higher screening rate included having a primary care physician, a post-high school educational level, and income of more than $25 000 per year. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this survey study suggest that older male respondents to the 2020 BRFSS survey were overscreened for prostate cancer despite the age cutoff for PSA screening recommended in national guidelines. Discussing the benefits of PSA testing with a clinician was associated with increased screening, underscoring the potential of clinician-level interventions to reduce overscreening in older males.

Large scale crowdsourced radiotherapy segmentations across a variety of cancer anatomic sites.

Clinician generated segmentation of tumor and healthy tissue regions of interest (ROIs) on medical images is crucial for radiotherapy. However, interobserver segmentation variability has long been considered a significant detriment to the implementation of high-quality and consistent radiotherapy dose delivery. This has prompted the increasing development of automated segmentation approaches. However, extant segmentation datasets typically only provide segmentations generated by a limited number of annotators with varying, and often unspecified, levels of expertise. In this data descriptor, numerous clinician annotators manually generated segmentations for ROIs on computed tomography images across a variety of cancer sites (breast, sarcoma, head and neck, gynecologic, gastrointestinal; one patient per cancer site) for the Contouring Collaborative for Consensus in Radiation Oncology challenge. In total, over 200 annotators (experts and non-experts) contributed using a standardized annotation platform (ProKnow). Subsequently, we converted Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine data into Neuroimaging Informatics Technology Initiative format with standardized nomenclature for ease of use. In addition, we generated consensus segmentations for experts and non-experts using the Simultaneous Truth and Performance Level Estimation method. These standardized, structured, and easily accessible data are a valuable resource for systematically studying variability in segmentation applications.

E pluribus unum: prospective acceptability benchmarking from the Contouring Collaborative for Consensus in Radiation Oncology crowdsourced initiative for multiobserver segmentation.

Purpose: Contouring Collaborative for Consensus in Radiation Oncology (C3RO) is a crowdsourced challenge engaging radiation oncologists across various expertise levels in segmentation. An obstacle to artificial intelligence (AI) development is the paucity of multiexpert datasets; consequently, we sought to characterize whether aggregate segmentations generated from multiple nonexperts could meet or exceed recognized expert agreement. Approach: Participants who contoured ≥ 1 region of interest (ROI) for the breast, sarcoma, head and neck (H&N), gynecologic (GYN), or gastrointestinal (GI) cases were identified as a nonexpert or recognized expert. Cohort-specific ROIs were combined into single simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE) consensus segmentations. STAPLE nonexpert ROIs were evaluated against STAPLE expert contours using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). The expert interobserver DSC ( IODSC expert ) was calculated as an acceptability threshold between STAPLE nonexpert and STAPLE expert . To determine the number of nonexperts required to match the IODSC expert for each ROI, a single consensus contour was generated using variable numbers of nonexperts and then compared to the IODSC expert . Results: For all cases, the DSC values for STAPLE nonexpert versus STAPLE expert were higher than comparator expert IODSC expert for most ROIs. The minimum number of nonexpert segmentations needed for a consensus ROI to achieve IODSC expert acceptability criteria ranged between 2 and 4 for breast, 3 and 5 for sarcoma, 3 and 5 for H&N, 3 and 5 for GYN, and 3 for GI. Conclusions: Multiple nonexpert-generated consensus ROIs met or exceeded expert-derived acceptability thresholds. Five nonexperts could potentially generate consensus segmentations for most ROIs with performance approximating experts, suggesting nonexpert segmentations as feasible cost-effective AI inputs.

Examining the Effect of Direct Patient Care for Medical Physicists: A Randomized Prospective Phase III Trial.

PURPOSE: Our purpose was to investigate the effect of physicist-patient consults on patient anxiety and patient satisfaction with a randomized prospective phase III clinical trial. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Sixty-six patients were randomly assigned to the physics direct patient care (PDPC) arm or the control arm of the trial. Patients assigned to the PDPC arm received 2 physicist-patient consults to educate them on the technical aspects of their radiation therapy, while patients assigned to the control arm received the standard of care (ie, standard radiation therapy workflow without any additional physicist-patient consults). Questionnaires were administered to all patients at 4 time points (after enrollment, after the simulation, after the first treatment, and after the last treatment) to assess anxiety and satisfaction. RESULTS: The decrease in anxiety for the PDPC arm, compared with the control arm, was statistically significant at the first treatment (P = .027) time point. The increase in technical satisfaction for the PDPC arm, compared with the control arm, was statistically significant at the simulation (P = .005), first treatment (P < .001), and last treatment (P = .002) time points. The increase in overall satisfaction for the PDPC arm, compared with the control arm, was statistically significant at the first treatment (P = .014) and last treatment (P = .001) time points. CONCLUSIONS: Physicist-patient consults improved the patient experience by decreasing anxiety and increasing satisfaction. Future work is needed to modify current radiation oncology workflows and medical physics responsibilities to allow all patients to benefit from this advancement in patient care.

Laparoscopic cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy: a prospective clinical trial and comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Open cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) is associated with high morbidity, which limits the degree to which patients may benefit from this therapy. This study aimed to determine the feasibility of laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC. METHODS: This was a single institution prospective clinical trial and comparative study using historical controls. Patients with histologically confirmed peritoneal surface malignancy (PSM) of appendiceal, colorectal, ovarian, or primary peritoneal origin, peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) [Formula: see text] 10 were eligible. RESULTS: Clinical trial: 18 patients (median age 57 years, 39% female) with appendiceal (15) or colorectal (3) primary PSM underwent laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC. Median and range outcomes were: operative time 219 min (134-378), EBL 10 mL (0-100), time to return to bowel function 3 days (1-7), duration IV narcotic use 3 days (1-8), length of stay 6 days (3-11). All patients had a complete cytoreduction (CC-score 0). Three (17%) experienced minor morbidity, with no major morbidity or mortality. Median DFS and OS were not reached with median follow-up of 48 months. Comparative analysis: Laparoscopic approach associated with reduced time to return of bowel function (3 versus 4 days, p = 0.001), length of stay (8 versus 5 days, p < 0.001), and morbidity (16% versus 42%, p = 0.008). Independent predictors of DFS included prior chemotherapy (HR 5.07, 95% CI 1.85, 13.89; p = 0.002), and CC-score > 0 (HR 3.31, 95% CI 1.19, 9.41; p = 0.025), but not surgical approach. CC-score > 0 was the only independent predictor of OS (HR 10.12, 95% CI 2.16, 47.30, p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Laparoscopic CRS/HIPEC should be considered for patients with PSM with low-volume disease, including those with adenocarcinoma histology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02463877.

Patient perspectives of prostate cancer screening vary by race following 2018 guideline changes.

BACKGROUND: The 2018 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend individualizing prostate cancer screening in 55- to 69-year-old men. Given the higher incidence of prostate cancer in African American (AA) compared to non-Hispanic White (NHW) men, this study compared reported rates of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening hypothesizing that it would not be commensurate with the relative risk between these two groups. METHODS: Using the 2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, we identified 43,685 men (40,301 NHW and 3384 AA) interviewed about PSA screening. RESULTS: AA men had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-0.93; p = .004) of reporting PSA screening; sequentially correcting for access to care, smoking, and age had minimal effect on this finding, but when correcting for income significantly attenuated this difference (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.12). Further adding education level eliminated the effect size of AA race entirely with OR, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.84-1.17; p = .91). Further analysis found significant interaction between education and race, with college-educated AA men having 1.42 OR of receiving screening compared to college-educated NHW men. CONCLUSIONS: Despite prostate cancer being more common and having higher population-level mortality in AA than NHW men, PSA screening and education patterns do not reflect this increased risk even when adjusting for health access disparities. The authors' findings of significant effect from both income and education suggest that systemic racism is an important factor in the observed difference in PSA screening between AA men and NHW men. LAY SUMMARY: In the United States, prostate cancer is more common in African American men New guidelines from 2018 encourage physicians to consider risk factors in deciding whether or not to recommend screening, but overall African American men continue to be screened at a lower rate than non-Hispanic White men This effect disappears when correcting for income and education level, suggesting that several factors including systemic racism, medical mistrust, and self-advocacy may impact this observed difference.

Association Between Primary Care Use Prior to Cancer Diagnosis and Subsequent Cancer Mortality in the Veterans Affairs Health System.

Importance: Primary care physicians (PCPs) are significant contributors of early cancer detection, yet few studies have investigated whether consistent primary care translates to improved downstream outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the association of prediagnostic primary care use with metastatic disease at diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (CSM). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used databases with primary care and referral linkage from multiple Veterans' Affairs centers from 2004 to 2017 and had a 68-month median follow-up. Analysis was completed between July 2021 and September 2022. Participants included veterans older than 39 years who had been diagnosed with 1 of 12 cancers. Inclusion criteria included known clinical staging, survival follow-up, cause of death, and receiving care at the Veterans Affairs health system (VA). Exposures: Prediagnostic PCP use, measured in the 5 years prior to diagnosis. PCP visits were binned into none (0 visits), some (1-4 visits), and annual (5 visits). Main Outcomes and Measures: Metastatic disease at diagnosis, cancer-specific mortality (CSM) for entire cohort and stratified by tumor subtype. Results: Among 245 425 patients representing 12 tumor subtypes, mean age was 65.8 (9.3) years, and the cohort skewed male (97.6%), and White (76.1%), with higher levels of comorbidity (58.6% with Charlson Comorbidity Index scores ≥2). Compared with no prior visit, some PCP use was associated with 26% decreased odds of metastatic disease at diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.76; P < .001) and 12% reduced risk of CSM (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86-0.89; P < .001). Annual PCP use was associated with 39% decreased odds of metastatic disease (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.59-0.63; P < .001) and 21% reduced risk of CSM (SHR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.77-0.81; P < .001). Among tumor subtypes, prostate cancer had the largest effect size for prior PCP use on metastatic disease at diagnosis (OR for annual use, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.30-0.35; P < .001) and CSM (SHRfor annual use, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.48-0.55; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, increased primary care use before cancer diagnosis was associated with significant decreases in metastatic disease at diagnosis and cancer-related death, with potentially the greatest difference from annual use. PCPs play a vital role in cancer prevention, and additional resources should be allocated to assist these physicians.

The impact of patient travel time on disparities in treatment for early stage lung cancer in California.

BACKGROUND: Travel time to treatment facilities may impede the receipt of guideline-concordant treatment (GCT) among patients diagnosed with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (ES-NSCLC). We investigated the relative contribution of travel time in the receipt of GCT among ES-NSCLC patients. METHODS: We included 22,821 ES-NSCLC patients diagnosed in California from 2006-2015. GCT was defined using the 2016 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, and delayed treatment was defined as treatment initiation >6 versus ≤6 weeks after diagnosis. Mean-centered driving and public transit times were calculated from patients' residential block group centroid to the treatment facilities. We used logistic regression to estimate risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between patients' travel time and receipt of GCT and timely treatment, overall and by race/ethnicity and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES). RESULTS: Overall, a 15-minute increase in travel time was associated with a decreased risk of undertreatment and delayed treatment. Compared to Whites, among Blacks, a 15-minute increase in driving time was associated with a 24% (95%CI = 8%-42%) increased risk of undertreatment, and among Filipinos, a 15-minute increase in public transit time was associated with a 27% (95%CI = 13%-42%) increased risk of delayed treatment. Compared to the highest nSES, among the lowest nSES, 15-minute increases in driving and public transit times were associated with 33% (95%CI = 16%-52%) and 27% (95%CI = 16%-39%) increases in the risk of undertreatment and delayed treatment, respectively. CONCLUSION: The benefit of GCT observed with increased travel times may be a 'Travel Time Paradox,' and may vary across racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups.

Association of Prostate-Specific Antigen Screening Rates With Subsequent Metastatic Prostate Cancer Incidence at US Veterans Health Administration Facilities.

Importance: There is controversy about the benefit of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening. Prostate-specific antigen screening rates have decreased since 2008 in the US, and the incidence of metastatic prostate cancer has increased. However, there is no direct epidemiologic evidence of a correlation between population PSA screening rates and subsequent metastatic prostate cancer rates. Objective: To assess whether facility-level variation in PSA screening rates is associated with subsequent facility-level metastatic prostate cancer incidence. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort used data for all men aged 40 years or older with an encounter at 128 facilities in the US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2019. Exposures: Yearly facility-level PSA screening rates, defined as the proportion of men aged 40 years or older with a PSA test in each year, and long-term nonscreening rates, defined as the proportion of men aged 40 years or older without a PSA test in the prior 3 years, from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2014. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were facility-level yearly counts of incident metastatic prostate cancer diagnoses and age-adjusted yearly metastatic prostate cancer incidence rates (per 100 000 men) 5 years after each PSA screening exposure year. Results: The cohort included 4 678 412 men in 2005 and 5 371 701 men in 2019. Prostate-specific antigen screening rates decreased from 47.2% in 2005 to 37.0% in 2019, and metastatic prostate cancer incidence increased from 5.2 per 100 000 men in 2005 to 7.9 per 100 000 men in 2019. Higher facility-level PSA screening rates were associated with lower metastatic prostate cancer incidence 5 years later (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.91 per 10% increase in PSA screening rate; 95% CI, 0.87-0.96; P < .001). Higher long-term nonscreening rates were associated with higher metastatic prostate cancer incidence 5 years later (IRR, 1.11 per 10% increase in long-term nonscreening rate; 95% CI, 1.03-1.19; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: From 2005 to 2019, PSA screening rates decreased in the national VHA system. Facilities with higher PSA screening rates had lower subsequent rates of metastatic prostate cancer. These data may be used to inform shared decision-making about the potential benefits of PSA screening among men who wish to reduce their risk of metastatic prostate cancer.

Changes in Cancer Mortality by Race and Ethnicity Following the Implementation of the Affordable Care Act in California.

Although Affordable Care Act (ACA) implementation has improved cancer outcomes, less is known about how much the improvement applies to different racial and ethnic populations. We examined changes in health insurance coverage and cancer-specific mortality rates by race/ethnicity pre- and post-ACA. We identified newly diagnosed breast (n = 117,738), colorectal (n = 38,334), and cervical cancer (n = 11,109) patients < 65 years in California 2007-2017. Hazard rate ratios (HRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using multivariable Cox regression to estimate risk of cancer-specific death pre- (2007-2010) and post-ACA (2014-2017) and by race/ethnicity [American Indian/Alaska Natives (AIAN); Asian American; Hispanic; Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (NHPI); non-Hispanic Black (NHB); non-Hispanic white (NHW)]. Cancer-specific mortality from colorectal cancer was lower post-ACA among Hispanic (HRR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.74 to 0.92), NHB (HRR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.58 to 0.82), and NHW (HRR = 0.90; 95% CI = 0.84 to 0.97) but not Asian American (HRR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.82 to 1.10) patients. We observed a lower risk of death from cervical cancer post-ACA among NHB women (HRR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.47 to 0.99). No statistically significant differences in breast cancer-specific mortality were observed for any racial or ethnic group. Cancer-specific mortality decreased following ACA implementation for colorectal and cervical cancers for some racial and ethnic groups in California, suggesting Medicaid expansion is associated with reductions in health inequity.

Evaluating High-Dimensional Machine Learning Models to Predict Hospital Mortality Among Older Patients With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Older hospitalized cancer patients face high risks of hospital mortality. Improved risk stratification could help identify high-risk patients who may benefit from future interventions, although we lack validated tools to predict in-hospital mortality for patients with cancer. We evaluated the ability of a high-dimensional machine learning prediction model to predict inpatient mortality and compared the performance of this model to existing prediction indices. METHODS: We identified patients with cancer older than 75 years from the National Emergency Department Sample between 2016 and 2018. We constructed a high-dimensional predictive model called Cancer Frailty Assessment Tool (cFAST), which used an extreme gradient boosting algorithm to predict in-hospital mortality. cFAST model inputs included patient demographic, hospital variables, and diagnosis codes. Model performance was assessed with an area under the curve (AUC) from receiver operating characteristic curves, with an AUC of 1.0 indicating perfect prediction. We compared model performance to existing indices including the Modified 5-Item Frailty Index, Charlson comorbidity index, and Hospital Frailty Risk Score. RESULTS: We identified 2,723,330 weighted emergency department visits among older patients with cancer, of whom 144,653 (5.3%) died in the hospital. Our cFAST model included 240 features and demonstrated an AUC of 0.92. Comparator models including the Modified 5-Item Frailty Index, Charlson comorbidity index, and Hospital Frailty Risk Score achieved AUCs of 0.58, 0.62, and 0.71, respectively. Predictive features of the cFAST model included acute conditions (respiratory failure and shock), chronic conditions (lipidemia and hypertension), patient demographics (age and sex), and cancer and treatment characteristics (metastasis and palliative care). CONCLUSION: High-dimensional machine learning models enabled accurate prediction of in-hospital mortality among older patients with cancer, outperforming existing prediction indices. These models show promise in identifying patients at risk of severe adverse outcomes, although additional validation and research studying clinical implementation of these tools is needed.