State of Cancer Care in America: Achieving Cancer Health Equity Among Sexual and Gender Minority Communities.

In 2017, ASCO issued the position statement, Strategies for Reducing Cancer Health Disparities Among Sexual and Gender Minority Populations, outlining five areas of recommendations to address the needs of both sexual and gender minority (SGM, eg, LGBTQ+) populations affected by cancer and members of the oncology workforce who identify as SGM: (1) patient education and support; (2) workforce development and diversity; (3) quality improvement strategies; (4) policy solutions; and (5) research strategies. In 2019, ASCO convened the SGM Task Force to help actualize the recommendations of the 2017 position statement. The percentage of the US population who publicly identify as SGM has increased dramatically over the past few years. Although increased national interest in SGM health equity has accompanied a general interest in research, policy change, and education around diversity, equity, and inclusion, resulting from public concern over discrimination in health care against Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, this has been accompanied by a surge in discriminatory legislation directly impacting the SGM community. Although much progress has been made in advancing SGM cancer health equity since 2017, more progress is needed to reduce disparities and advance equity. The five focus areas outlined in the 2017 ASCO position statement remain relevant, as we must continue to promote and advance equity in quality improvement, workforce development, patient care, research, and SGM-affirming policies. This article reports on the progress toward reducing SGM cancer disparities and achieving equity across these five areas and identifies future directions for the work that still remains.

Caregiver costs and financial burden in caregivers of African American cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: People with cancer commonly rely on loved ones as informal caregivers during and after treatment. Costs related to caregiving and their association with caregiver financial burden are not well understood. METHODS: Results include data from 964 caregivers of African American cancer survivors in the Detroit Research on Cancer Survivors (ROCS) cohort. Caregiving costs include those related to medications, logistics (e.g., transportation), and medical bills. Financial burden measures included caregiver financial resources, strain, and difficulty paying caregiving costs. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of associations between costs and high financial burden were calculated using modified Poisson models controlling for caregiver characteristics. RESULTS: Caregivers included spouses (36%), non-married partners (8%), family members (48%), and friends (9%). Nearly two-thirds (64%) of caregivers reported costs related to caregiving. Logistical costs were the most common (58%), followed by medication costs (35%) and medical bills (17%). High financial hardship was reported by 38% of caregivers. Prevalence of high financial hardship was 52% (95% CI: 24%, 86%) higher among caregivers who reported any versus no caregiver costs. Associations between caregiver costs and high financial burden were evident for costs related to medications (PR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.12, 1.58), logistics (PR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.29, 1.92), and medical bills (PR: 1.57, 95% CI: 1.28, 1.92). CONCLUSIONS: Most caregivers experienced costs related to caregiving, and these costs were associated with higher prevalence of high caregiver financial burden. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Informal caregivers experience financial hardship related to cancer along with cancer survivors.

Sexual and gender minority cultural humility training for oncology settings: An example of iterative adaptation and implementation.

Background: Multiple national organizations recommend that cancer care providers and oncology practices be responsive to the needs of sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients. Oncology practices have attempted to incorporate this recommendation through SGM-focused cultural humility training interventions. It is unclear how best to adapt and implement such training across practices. This manuscript outlines one process for adapting a widely-used SGM training from The Fenway Institute to the context of oncology settings using the Framework for Reporting Adaptations and Modifications-Enhanced (FRAME) model. Methods: We conducted training sessions in two oncology care settings: a breast oncology center and a radiation oncology department. Subsequently, we conducted in-depth interviews with the three trainers involved in adapting The Fenway Institute's training to these two practices. Two independent investigators coded the interviews using components of the FRAME model as an analytic guide. Results: Training team members described the mechanisms by which FRAME adaption occurred both proactively and reactively; the importance of involving SGM-identified trainers of diverse backgrounds as well as champions from within oncology practices in which trainings were conducted; the importance of adapting both the context and content of training to be relevant to oncology audiences; and the ways in which fidelity to the core principles of improving health care for SGM patients was maintained throughout the process. Discussion: SGM cultural humility training for oncology providers and staff must undergo iterative adaptation to address the political and social context of specific practice environments and advocate for broader institutional culture change to achieve responsiveness to SGM health needs.

Current Practices for Screening and Addressing Financial Hardship within the NCI Community Oncology Research Program.

BACKGROUND: Cancer-related financial hardship is associated with poor care outcomes and reduced quality of life for patients and families. Scalable intervention development to address financial hardship requires knowledge of current screening practices and services within community cancer care. METHODS: The NCI Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) 2017 Landscape Assessment survey assessed financial screening and financial navigation practices within U.S. community oncology practices. Logistic models evaluated associations between financial hardship screening and availability of a cancer-specific financial navigator and practice group characteristics (e.g., safety-net designation, critical access hospital, proportion of racial and ethnic minority patients served). RESULTS: Of 221 participating NCORP practice groups, 72% reported a financial screening process and 50% had a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practice groups with more than 10% of new patients with cancer enrolled in Medicaid (adjOR = 2.81, P = 0.02) and with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 3.91, P < 0.01) were more likely to screen for financial concerns. Practice groups with less than 30% racial/ethnic minority cancer patient composition (adjOR = 2.37, P < 0.01) were more likely to have a dedicated financial navigator or counselor for patients with cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Most NCORP practice groups screen for financial concerns and half have a cancer-specific financial navigator. Practices serving more racial or ethnic minority patients are less likely to screen and have a designated financial navigator. IMPACT: The effectiveness of financial screening and navigation for mitigating financial hardship could be tested within NCORP, along with specific interventions to address cancer care inequities.See related commentary by Yabroff et al., p. 593.

Racial/Ethnic Differences in Comprehension of Biospecimen Collection: a Nationwide University of Rochester Cancer Center NCI Community Oncology Research Program Study.

To examine whether (a) non-minority participants differed from racial minority participants in the understanding of biospecimens collected for research purposes, (b) patients differed from comparison group in their understanding of the ways their biospecimens could be used by researchers, and (c) participants received adequate information before consenting to donate blood for research studies. We analyzed cross-sectional data from female breast cancer patients scheduled to receive chemotherapy at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) clinical sites and a healthy comparison group. After reading a consent form related to biospecimens and consenting to participate in a clinical trial, participants' understanding of biospecimen collection was evaluated. Linear models were used to compare scores between non-minority and racial minority participants as well as cancer and non-cancer comparisons adjusting for possible confounding factors. A total of 650 participants provided evaluable data; 592 were non-minority (Caucasian) and 58 participants were a racial minority (71% Black and 29% other). There were 427 cancer patients and 223 comparisons. Non-minority participants scored higher than racial minorities on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.48, CI 0.13-0.80, p = 0.001). Comparison group scored higher than cancer patients on relevance-to-care items (diff. = 0.58, CI 0.37-0.78). A moderate number of the participants exhibited a poor understanding of biospecimen collection across all racial/ethnic backgrounds, but racial minority participants' scores remained lower in the relevance-to-care subscale even after adjusting for education and reading level. Differences were also noted among the patients and comparison group. Researchers should facilitate comprehension of biospecimen collection for all study participants, especially racial minority participants.