Toward reducing racialized pain care disparities: Approaching cannabis research and access through the lens of equity and inclusion.

There is growing interest in cannabis use for cancer pain. This commentary aims to discuss the evidence surrounding cannabis use for cancer pain in the context of the long-racialized landscape of cannabis policies and the disparity in pain control among cancer patients holding minoritized racial identities. Much evidence surrounding both the benefits and harms of cannabis use in cancer patients, and all patients in general, is lacking. Although drawing on the research in cancer that is available, it is also important to illustrate the broader context about how cannabis' deep roots in medical, political, and social history impact patient use and health care policies. There are lessons we can learn from the racialized disparities in opioid risk mitigation strategies, so they are not replicated in the settings of cannabis for cancer symptom management. Additionally, the authors intentionally use the term "cannabis" here rather than "marijuana.: In the early 1900s, the lay press and government popularized the use of the word "marijuana" instead of the more common "cannabis" to tie the drug to anti-Mexican prejudice.

Engaging community members in cancer research: an assessment of an NCI-designated cancer center.

PURPOSE: Despite the importance of engaging community members in research, multiple barriers exist. We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation to understand the opportunities and challenges of engaging community members in basic, clinical, translational, and population science research. METHODS: We designed a survey and an interview guide based on the constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Surveys were distributed electronically to all cancer center investigators and interviews were conducted virtually with a select group of basic, clinical, and population science investigators. Survey data (n = 77) were analyzed across all respondents using frequency counts and mean scores; bivariate analyses examined differences in responses by research program affiliation, gender, race, and faculty rank. Interviews (n = 16) were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a reflective thematic approach. RESULTS: There was strong agreement among investigators that "Community engagement in research will help the SKCC address cancer disparities in the catchment area" (M 4.2, SD 0.9) and less agreement with items such as "I know how to find and connect with community members who I can engage in my research" (M 2.5, SD 1.3). Investigators mentioned challenges in communicating complex science to a lay audience but were open to training and workshops to acquire skills needed to integrate community members into their research. CONCLUSION: Cancer centers should develop and promote training and collaborative opportunities for investigators and community members. Overcoming challenges will lead to more patient- and community-centered cancer research in the future.

A Prioritized Patient-Centered Research Agenda to Reduce Disparities in Telehealth Uptake: Results from a National Consensus Conference.

Introduction: We hosted a national consensus conference with a diverse group of stakeholders to develop a patient-centered research agenda focused on reducing disparities in telehealth use. Methods: Attendees were purposively invited to participate in a 2-day virtual conference. The group developed a prioritized research agenda focused on reducing disparities in telehealth uptake, with discussion informed by findings from a scoping review. All work was conducted in partnership with a Steering Committee of national experts in telehealth and patient-centered care (n = 5) and a community-based Telehealth Advisory Board with experience with telehealth use and barriers (n = 8). Results: Sixty individuals participated in the conference and discussion resulted in a final list of 20 questions. Fifty-two attendees voted on the final prioritization of these questions. Results were aggregated for all voters (n = 52) and patient-only voters (n = 8). The top question identified by both groups focused on patient and family perspectives on important barriers to telehealth use. The entire group voting identified telehealth's impact on patient outcomes as the next most important questions, while the patient-only group identified trust-related considerations and cultural factors impacting telehealth use as next priorities. Conclusions: This project involved extensive patient and stakeholder engagement. While voting varied between patients only and the entire group of conference attendees, top identified priorities included patient and family perspectives on important barriers to telehealth, trust and cultural barriers and facilitators to telehealth, and assessment of telehealth's impact on patient outcomes. This research agenda can inform design of future research focused on addressing disparities in telehealth use.

Predictors of Population Awareness of Cancer Genetic Tests: Implications for Enhancing Equity in Engaging in Cancer Prevention and Precision Medicine.

Racial and ethnic disparities in genetic awareness (GA) can diminish the impact of personalized cancer treatment and risk assessment. We assessed factors predictive of GA in a diverse population-based sample to inform awareness strategies and reduce disparities in genetic testing. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted from July 2019 to August 2019, with the survey e-mailed to 7,575 adult residents in southeastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Constructs from National Cancer Institute Health Information and National Trends Survey assessed cancer attitudes or beliefs, health literacy, and numeracy. Characteristics were summarized with mean ± standard deviation for numeric variables and frequency counts and percentages for categorical variables. Comparison of factors by race or ethnicity (non-Hispanic White and non-Hispanic Black) and sex was conducted by t-tests, chi-square, or Fisher's exact tests. Multivariate logistic regression models were conducted to identify factors independently predictive of GA. RESULTS: Of 1,557 respondents, data from 940 respondents (the mean age was 45 ± 16.2 years, 35.5% males, and 23% non-Hispanic Blacks) were analyzed. Factors associated with higher GA included female gender (P < .001), non-Hispanic White (P < .001), college education (P < .001), middle-higher income (P < .001), stronger belief in genetic basis of cancer (P < .001), lower cancer fatalism (P = .004), motivation for cancer information (P < .001), and higher numeracy (P = .002). On multivariate analysis, college education (odds ratio [OR] 1.79; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.63), higher motivation for cancer information (OR 1.56; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.09), stronger belief in genetics of cancer (OR 2.21; 95% CI, 1.48 to 3.30), and higher medical literacy (OR 2.21; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.65) predicted greater GA. CONCLUSION: This population-based study conducted in the precision medicine era identified novel modifiable factors, importantly perceptions of cancer genetics and medical literacy, as predictive of GA, which informs strategies to promote equitable engagement in genetically based cancer care.

Validity of the screener and opioid assessment for patients with pain-revised (SOAPP-R) in patients with cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the utility of the screener and opioid assessment for patients with pain-revised (SOAPP-R) for patients with cancer-related pain. DESIGN: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of cancer patients screened with the SOAPP-R. Opiate abuse was determined using a combination of urine drug screens and analysis of patients' electronic medical records. SETTING/PATIENTS: Patients who were seen at a palliative care clinic presenting with pain or needing an opioid prescription at an academic medical center with any type of cancer were screened using the SOAPP-R (N = 69). OUTCOME MEASURES: Aberrant opioid-related behavior was determined using a combination of provider notes and urine drug screens. RESULTS: A positive SOAPP-R score (⩾18) was observed in 27 participants (39.1 percent). The sensitivity and specificity of the SOAPP-R in the study population was 0.75 and 0.80, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The SOAPP-R, in its current form, may have value in screening patients with cancer for substance abuse. Incorporation of the screening tool in palliative and oncology settings may help reduce opioid abuse in cancer patients.

An exploratory study of adolescent female reactions to direct-to-consumer advertising: the case of the Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccine.

When the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine was approved in 2006, an extensive direct-to-consumer (DTC) advertising campaign raised awareness and promoted vaccination. This study explores adolescents' exposure to and understanding of the messages in these advertisements. Sixty-seven African American females participated in a focus group about DTC advertising for the HPV vaccine. Virtually all adolescents had seen an HPV vaccine DTC advertisement, but most did not understand the health information contained in it. If DTC advertising is to be an effective source of health information for adolescents in the future, it must take into account the unique features of an adolescent audience.

Are patterns of health behavior associated with cancer screening?

PURPOSE: This study investigates the relationship between patterns of health behaviors and the use of cancer-screening tests while controlling for sociodemographic and health system factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of the 2000 National Health Interview (NHIS). SETTING: Nationally representative sample. SUBJECTS: Adults 50 years and older. MEASURES: Use of cancer-screening tests, health behaviors, sociodemographic factors, and health system factors from self-reported responses from the NHIS. Sixteen health behavior patterns were identified based on lifestyle recommendations for physical activity, tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and fruit and vegetable consumption. RESULTS: Health behavior patterns, age, educational attainment, usual source of care, and health insurance were significantly associated with the use of breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer screening (p < .05). Approximate R2 for the four models ranged from .067 for colorectal cancer screening in women to .122 for cervical cancer screening. Having a usual source of care was the strongest correlate of screening; the magnitude of associations for health behavior patterns and demographic variables and screening was similar and much smaller than those for usual source of care. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate relationships between patterns of multiple health behaviors and use of recommended cancer-screening tests, even when accounting for factors known to influence test use. This suggests potential for addressing cancer screening in the context of multiple behavior change interventions once barriers to health care access are removed.