Black cancer patients navigating a health-care system of racial discrimination.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to racial discrimination may exacerbate disparities throughout the cancer care continuum. Therefore, we explored how experiences of racial discrimination in the health-care setting manifest for Black cancer patients and how it contributes to racial disparities in cancer care. METHODS: This qualitative analysis used semistructured in-depth interviews with Black cancer survivors not on active treatment from May 2019 to March 2020. All interviews were audio recorded, professionally transcribed, and uploaded into Dedoose software for analysis. We identified major themes and subthemes that highlight exposure to racial discrimination and its consequences for Black cancer patients when receiving cancer care. RESULTS: Participants included 18 Black cancer survivors, aged 29-88 years. Most patients experienced racial discrimination when seeking care. Participants experienced racial discrimination from their interactions with health-care staff, medical assistants, front desk staff, and health insurance administrators. Exposure to overt racial discrimination in the health-care setting was rooted in racial stereotypes and manifested through verbal insults such as physicians using phrases such as "you people." These experiences impacted the ability of the health-care delivery system to demonstrate trustworthiness. Patients noted "walking out" of their visit and not having their health issues addressed. Despite experiences with racial discrimination, patients still sought care out of necessity believing it was an inevitable part of the Black individual experience. CONCLUSION: We identified that exposure to racial discrimination in the health-care setting is pervasive, affects health-seeking behaviors, and degrades the patient-clinician relationship, which may likely contribute to racial disparities in cancer care.

Racial and ethnic disparities in self-reported general and mental health status among colorectal cancer survivors: impact of sociodemographic factors and implications for mortality-a SEER-CAHPS study.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcomes are recognized as strong predictors of cancer prognosis. This study examines racial and ethnic differences in self-reported general health status (GHS) and mental health status (MHS) among patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of Medicare beneficiaries between 1998 and 2011 with non-distant CRC who underwent curative resection and completed a Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey within 6-36 months of CRC diagnosis. Analysis included a stepwise logistic regression to examine the relationship between race and ethnicity and fair or poor health status, and a proportional hazards model to determine the mortality risk associated with fair or poor health status. RESULTS: Of 1867 patients, Non-Hispanic Black (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.06-2.28) and Hispanic (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.04-2.11) patients had higher unadjusted odds for fair or poor GHS compared to Non-Hispanic White patients, also Hispanic patients had higher unadjusted odds for fair or poor MHS (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.23-3.01). These relationships persisted after adjusting for clinical factors but were attenuated after subsequently adjusting for sociodemographic factors. Compared to those reporting good to excellent health status, patients reporting fair or poor GHS or MHS had an increased mortality risk (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31-1.76 and OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.34-1.99, respectively). CONCLUSION: Racial and ethnic differences in GHS and MHS reported after CRC diagnosis are mainly driven by sociodemographic factors and reflect a higher risk of mortality. Identifying unmet biopsychosocial needs is necessary to promote equitable care.

Experience of a single academic institution with the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer and the resulting improvement in care.

AIM: The American College of Surgeons Committee on Cancer developed the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer (NAPRC) to reduce variations in rectal cancer care, standardize clinical practice and encourage multidisciplinary approaches. The aim of this study was to analyse if accreditation achieved a higher quality of care at one hospital. METHOD: The University of California Davis Medical Center was accredited in 2019. A retrospective review of rectal adenocarcinoma patients was performed between the years 2013 and 2018. Patients presenting from 2013 to 2015 were discussed at a gastrointestinal tumour board while patients in 2018 had an accredited rectal cancer tumour board. Patients from 2016 to 2017 were excluded as the programme was still developing. Compliance to the NAPRC standards was compared between the cohorts. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty patients were evaluated, 88 (68%) in the prerectal tumour board cohort and 42 (32%) in the rectal tumour board cohort. The prerectal tumour board cohort often failed to meet attendance standards. All patients in the rectal tumour board cohort met all criteria. Similarly, clinical service compliance improved in the rectal tumour board cohort for 13 metrics, 10 of which were statistically significant. Although a high proportion of patients in both groups experienced quality surgery, i.e. complete total mesorectal excision and negative margins, the lack of complete pathological reporting in the prerectal tumour board cohort limited analysis. CONCLUSION: Multidisciplinary rectal cancer tumour boards are associated with improved compliance with recommended care by the NAPRC. Patients discussed at a rectal cancer tumour board were more likely to receive appropriate staging, coordinated care and have better clinical documentation.

Patient and provider perspectives to utilization of telemedicine in surgery.

Objectives: Determine patient and provider perspectives on widespread rapid telemedicine implementation, understand the key components of a surgical telemedicine visit and identify factors that affect future telemedicine use. Summary of background data: Compared to other specialties, the field of surgery heretofore has had limited adoption of telemedicine. During the COVID-19 pandemic Healthcare, including the surgical specialties, saw new widespread use of telemedicine. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study during the COVID-19 California stay-at-home and physical distancing executive orders. Utilization data were collected from clinics and compared to usage data during the same time 1 year later. All patients and providers who participated in a telemedicine visit during the study period were asked to complete a survey after each encounter and the surveys were analyzed for trends in opinions on future use by stakeholders. Results: Over the 10-week period, the median percentage of telemedicine visits per clinic was 33% (17%-51%) which peaked 3 weeks into implementation. One hundred and ninety-one patients (48% women) with a median age of 64 years (IQR 53-73) completed the patient survey. Patients were first-time participants in telemedicine in 41% (n = 79) of visits. Fifty-seven percent (n = 45) of first-time users preferred that future visits be in-person versus 31% of prior users (p = 0.007). The median travel time from home to the clinic was 40 min (IQR = 20-90). Patients with longer travel times were not more likely to use telemedicine in the future (61% with longer travel vs. 53% shorter, p = 0.11). From the 148 provider responses, 90% of the visits providers were able to create a definitive plan with the telemedicine visit. A physical exam was determined not to be needed in 45% of the visits. An attempt at any physical exam was not performed in 84% of routine follow-up or new-patient visits, compared to 53% of post-op visits (p = 0.001). Conclusion: Telemedicine is a viable ambulatory visit option for surgical specialists and their patients. During rapid telemedicine deployment, travel distance did not correlate with increased use of telemedicine, and in-person visits are still preferred. However, nearly half of all visits did not need a physical exam, which favors telemedicine use.

Severe Obesity Contributes to Worse Outcomes After Elective Colectomy for Chronic Diverticular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Both obesity and chronic diverticular disease (DD) are on the rise. Understanding surgical outcomes for patients with obesity undergoing colectomy for DD is imperative to improve care and minimize complications. Our objective was to investigate the impact of obesity on outcomes after elective colectomy specifically for chronic DD. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2012 to 2018, patients who underwent elective colectomy for chronic DD were grouped into four body mass index categories. Baseline characteristics, surgical approach and procedure, and 30-day morbidity and mortality were assessed. RESULTS: Of 24,559 patients, 21.7% were of normal weight, 35.8% were overweight, 35.9% were obese, and 6.6% were severely obese. Patients with severe obesity were younger, more functionally dependent, and had more comorbidities (all P [Formula: see text] 0.0001). Patients with severe obesity were more likely to have unplanned conversion to open surgery from laparoscopic and robotic approaches (AOR 2.15, 95% CI 1.24-3.70). Obesity class did not significantly affect the type of surgical procedure patients underwent (Hartmann's, colectomy with anastomosis and diversion, or colectomy with primary anastomosis). There were increased odds of any perioperative complications (AOR 1.43, 95% CI 1.19-1.71) and non-home discharge (AOR 2.39, 95% CI 1.59-3.57) in patients with severe obesity compared to normal weight patients. CONCLUSIONS: Obesity is associated with poorer outcomes in patients undergoing elective colectomy for chronic DD. Futures studies to examine the impact of preemptive weight loss to improve outcomes after elective colectomy for chronic sequelae of DD are needed.

Advances in Modeling the Immune Microenvironment of Colorectal Cancer.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer and second leading cause of cancer-related death in the US. CRC frequently metastasizes to the liver and these patients have a particularly poor prognosis. The infiltration of immune cells into CRC tumors and liver metastases accurately predicts disease progression and patient survival. Despite the evident influence of immune cells in the CRC tumor microenvironment (TME), efforts to identify immunotherapies for CRC patients have been limited. Here, we argue that preclinical model systems that recapitulate key features of the tumor microenvironment-including tumor, stromal, and immune cells; the extracellular matrix; and the vasculature-are crucial for studies of immunity in the CRC TME and the utility of immunotherapies for CRC patients. We briefly review the discoveries, advantages, and disadvantages of current in vitro and in vivo model systems, including 2D cell culture models, 3D culture systems, murine models, and organ-on-a-chip technologies.

X-Ray Psoralen Activated Cancer Therapy (X-PACT).

This work investigates X-PACT (X-ray Psoralen Activated Cancer Therapy): a new approach for the treatment of solid cancer. X-PACT utilizes psoralen, a potent anti-cancer therapeutic with current application to proliferative disease and extracorporeal photopheresis (ECP) of cutaneous T Cell Lymphoma. An immunogenic role for light-activated psoralen has been reported, contributing to long-term clinical responses. Psoralen therapies have to-date been limited to superficial or extracorporeal scenarios due to the requirement for psoralen activation by UVA light, which has limited penetration in tissue. X-PACT solves this challenge by activating psoralen with UV light emitted from novel non-tethered phosphors (co-incubated with psoralen) that absorb x-rays and re-radiate (phosphoresce) at UV wavelengths. The efficacy of X-PACT was evaluated in both in-vitro and in-vivo settings. In-vitro studies utilized breast (4T1), glioma (CT2A) and sarcoma (KP-B) cell lines. Cells were exposed to X-PACT treatments where the concentrations of drug (psoralen and phosphor) and radiation parameters (energy, dose, and dose rate) were varied. Efficacy was evaluated primarily using flow cell cytometry in combination with complimentary assays, and the in-vivo mouse study. In an in-vitro study, we show that X-PACT induces significant tumor cell apoptosis and cytotoxicity, unlike psoralen or phosphor alone (p<0.0001). We also show that apoptosis increases as doses of phosphor, psoralen, or radiation increase. Finally, in an in-vivo pilot study of BALBc mice with syngeneic 4T1 tumors, we show that the rate of tumor growth is slower with X-PACT than with saline or AMT + X-ray (p<0.0001). Overall these studies demonstrate a potential therapeutic effect for X-PACT, and provide a foundation and rationale for future studies. In summary, X-PACT represents a novel treatment approach in which well-tolerated low doses of x-ray radiation are delivered to a specific tumor site to generate UVA light which in-turn unleashes both short- and potentially long-term antitumor activity of photo-active therapeutics like psoralen.