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.

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.

Prioritizing rural populations in state comprehensive cancer control plans: a qualitative assessment.

PURPOSE: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) requires that states develop comprehensive cancer control (CCC) plans and recommends that disparities related to rural residence are addressed in these plans. The objective of this study was to explore rural partner engagement and describe effective strategies for incorporating a rural focus in CCC plans. METHODS: States were selected for inclusion using stratified sampling based on state rurality and region. State cancer control leaders were interviewed about facilitators and barriers to engaging rural partners and strategies for prioritizing rural populations. Content analysis was conducted to identify themes across states. RESULTS: Interviews (n = 30) revealed themes in three domains related to rural inclusion in CCC plans. The first domain (barriers) included (1) designing CCC plans to be broad, (2) defining "rural populations," and (3) geographic distance. The second domain (successful strategies) included (1) collaborating with rural healthcare systems, (2) recruiting rural constituents, (3) leveraging rural community-academic partnerships, and (4) working jointly with Native nations. The third domain (strategies for future plan development) included (1) building relationships with rural communities, (2) engaging rural constituents in planning, (3) developing a better understanding of rural needs, and (4) considering resources for addressing rural disparities. CONCLUSION: Significant relationship building with rural communities, resource provision, and successful strategies used by others may improve inclusion of rural needs in state comprehensive cancer control plans and ultimately help plan developers directly address rural cancer health disparities.

Racial disparities in palliative care utilization among metastatic gynecological cancer patients living at last follow-up: An analysis of the National Cancer Data Base.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network recommends palliative care should be integrated in to cancer care starting from cancer diagnosis. However, traditionally palliative care is prioritized for cancer patients at the end-of-life. In our main article titled "Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Palliative Care Utilization Among Gynecological Cancer Patients" we present data describing racial/ethnic disparities among metastatic gynecological cancer patients who were deceased at last follow-up. Here, we expand our population to evaluate racial disparities in palliative care utilization among (1) all metastatic gynecologic cancer patients, regardless of vital status (alive or deceased) (n = 176,899) and (2) among only patients who were alive at last follow-up (n = 66,781). We used data from the 2016 National Cancer Database (NCDB) and included patients between ages 18-90 years with metastatic (stage III-IV) gynecologic cancers including, ovarian, cervical and uterine cancer. Palliative care was defined by NCDB as non-curative treatment, and could include surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and pain management or any combination. We used multivariable logistic regression to evaluate racial disparities in palliative care use among our two populations of interest. Overall, the mean age of gynecologic cancer patients utilizing palliative care was 66 years. Five percent of all metastatic gynecologic oncology patients utilized palliative care overall; and by cancer site palliative care use was as follows: 4% among ovarian, 9% among cervical, and 11% among uterine cancer patients. Among patients who utilized palliative care, 62% utilized surgery, radiation or chemotherapy only and 12% utilized pain management as a form of palliative care. Among ovarian cancer patients, Hispanic ovarian cancer patients were less likely to utilize palliative care compared to their NH-White counterparts (aOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.68-0.91). Among cervical cancer patients, we observed that Hispanic (aOR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.56-0.75) and Asian (aOR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.59-0.93) were less likely to utilize palliative care than NH-White cervical cancer patients. We observed no racial disparities in palliative care utilization among uterine cancer patients. When we focused on patients who were alive at last follow-up we found that only 3% of patients utilized palliative care. We also conducted multivariable analyses of racial/ethnic disparities among ovarian and cervical cancer patients who were alive at last follow-up. We were unable to conduct multivariable analyses of uterine cancer patients who were alive at last follow-up due to limited sample size of those who utilized palliative care. We observed no racial/ethnic disparities among this patient population of metastatic gynecologic patients.

The COVID-19 cannabis health study: Results from an epidemiologic assessment of adults who use cannabis for medicinal reasons in the United States.

Background: Clinical indications for medicinal cannabis include chronic conditions; thus users (MCUs) are at an increased risk of morbidity and mortality resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19). The study aimed to provide data on cannabis use and self-reported behavioral changes among MCUs with preexisting chronic conditions in response to the pandemic.Methods: An internet-based questionnaire was administered to adults ≥18 who self-reported medicinal cannabis use within the past year. Data are from respondents between March 21 and April 23, 2020; response rate was 83.3%. Health conditions and cannabis frequency, route, and patterns of use were assessed via the COVID-19 Cannabis Health Questionnaire (Vidot et al. 2020).Results: Participants (N = 1202) were predominantly non-Hispanic white (82.5%) and 52.0% male (mean age 47.2 years). Mental health (76.7%), pain (43.7%), cardiometabolic (32.9%), respiratory (16.8%), and autoimmune (12.2%) conditions were most reported. Those with mental health conditions reported increased medicinal cannabis use by 91% since COVID-19 was declared a pandemic compared to those with no mental health conditions (adjusted odds ratio: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.38-2.65). 6.8% reported suspected COVID-19 symptoms. Two percent (2.1%) have been tested for COVID-19 with only 1 positive test result. Some MCUs (16%) changed their route of cannabis administration, switching to nonsmoking forms.Conclusions: The majority of MCUs reported at least one preexisting chronic health condition. Over half report fear of COVID-19 diagnosis and giving the virus to someone else; yet only some switched from smoking to nonsmoking forms of cannabis. Clinicians may consider asking about cannabis use among their patients, particularly those with chronic health conditions.