Global Workforce and Access: Demand, Education, Quality.

There has long existed a substantial disparity in access to radiotherapy globally. This issue has only been exacerbated as the growing disparity of cancer incidence between high-income countries (HIC) and low and middle-income countries (LMICs) widens, with a pronounced increase in cancer cases in LMICs. Even within HICs, iniquities within local communities may lead to a lack of access to care. Due to these trends, it is imperative to find solutions to narrow global disparities. This requires the engagement of a diverse cohort of stakeholders, including working professionals, non-governmental organizations, nonprofits, professional societies, academic and training institutions, and industry. This review brings together a diverse group of experts to highlight critical areas that could help reduce the current global disparities in radiation oncology. Advancements in technology and treatment, such as artificial intelligence, brachytherapy, hypofractionation, and digital networks, in combination with implementation science and novel funding mechanisms, offer means for increasing access to care and education globally. Common themes across sections reveal how utilizing these new innovations and strengthening collaborative efforts among stakeholders can help improve access to care globally while setting the framework for the next generation of innovations.

The impact of a positive COVID-19 test on timeliness of radiation in patients receiving brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND: Delays in initiating and completing brachytherapy may have adverse oncologic outcomes for patients with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on brachytherapy in the United States has not been well-characterized. OBJECTIVES: We aim to evaluate how a positive COVID-19 test affected timeliness of treatment for patients undergoing brachytherapy for cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer in 2019 and 2020 who received brachytherapy in their treatment. Patients who tested positive for COVID-19 between cancer diagnosis and start of radiation were compared to those who did not test positive for COVID-19. Time in days from cancer diagnosis to initiation of radiation was compared using two-sample t-tests with p < 0.05 signifying significant differences. RESULTS: We identified 38,341 patients with cervical (n = 6,925), uterine (n = 18,587), and prostate cancer (n = 12,829). Rates of COVID-19 positivity were cervical cancer (n = 135; 2%), uterine cancer (n = 236; 1.3%), and prostate cancer (n = 141; 1%). Of those, 35% of cervical, 49% of uterine, and 43% of prostate cancer patients tested positive between their cancer diagnosis and initiation of radiation. Median days to radiation was significantly longer in these patients: 78 versus 51 for cervical cancer (p < 0.01), 150 versus 104 for uterine cancer (p < 0.01), and 154 versus 124 for prostate cancer (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with cervical, uterine, and prostate cancer diagnosed between 2019-2020, testing positive for COVID-19 after their cancer diagnosis was associated with a delay to initiation of radiation by 4-7 weeks.

Increasing Lung Cancer Screening for High-Risk Smokers in a Frontier Population.

Northern Plains American Indians (AIs) have some of the highest smoking and lung cancer mortality rates in the USA. They are a high-risk population in which many are eligible for low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, but such screening is rarely used. This study investigated methods to increase LDCT utilization through both a provider and community intervention to lower lung cancer mortality rates. This study used the Precaution Adoption Model for provider and community interventions implemented in four study regions in western South Dakota. The goal was to increase LDCT screening for eligible participants. Intake surveys and LDCT screenings were compared at baseline and 6 months following the education programs for both interventions. A total of 131 providers participated in the provider intervention. At the 6-month follow-up survey, 31 (63%) referred at least one patient for LDCT (p < 0.05). Forty (32.3%) community participants reported their provider recommended an LDCT and of those, 30(75%) reported getting an LDCT (p < 0.05). A total of 2829 patient surveys were completed at the imaging sites and most (88%, n = 962) cited provider recommendation as their reason for obtaining an LDCT. Almost half (46%; n = 131) of the referring providers attended a provider education workshop, and 73% of the providers worked at a clinic that hosted at least one community education session. Over the study period, LDCT utilization increased from 640 to 1706, a 90.9% increase. The provider intervention had the strongest impact on LDCT utilization. This study demonstrated increased LDCT utilization through the provider intervention but increases also were documented for the other intervention combinations. The community-based education program increased both community and provider awareness on the value of LDCTs to lower lung cancer mortality rates.

Sensitivity of US Preventive Services Task Force and PLCOm2012 lung cancer screening eligibility criteria in individuals with lung cancer in South Dakota self-reporting as Indigenous and non-Indigenous.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Screening individuals who are at elevated risk using low-dose computed tomography reduces lung cancer mortality by ≥20%. Individuals who have community-based factors that contribute to an increased risk of developing lung cancer have high lung cancer rates and are diagnosed at younger ages. In this study of lung cancer in South Dakota, the authors compared the sensitivity of screening eligibility criteria for self-reported Indigenous race and evaluated the need for screening at younger ages. METHODS: US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 and 2021 (USPSTF2013 and USPSTF2021) criteria and two versions of the PLCOm2012 risk-prediction model (based on the 2012 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian [PLCO] Cancer Screening Trial), one with a predictor for race and one without, were applied at USPSTF-equivalent thresholds of ≥1.7% in 6 years and ≥1.0% in 6 years to 1565 individuals who were sequentially diagnosed with lung cancer (of whom 12.7% self-reported as Indigenous) at the Monument Health Cancer Care Institute in South Dakota (2010-2019). RESULTS: Eligibility sensitivities of USPSTF criteria did not differ significantly between individuals who self-reported their race as Indigenous and those who did not (p > .05). Sensitivities of both PLCOm2012 models were significantly higher than comparable USPSTF criteria. The sensitivity of USPSTF2021 criteria was 66.1% and, for comparable PLCOm2012 models with and without race, sensitivity was 90.7% and 89.6%, respectively (both p < .001); 1.4% of individuals were younger than 50 years, and proportions did not differ by Indigenous classification (p = .518). CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in screening eligibility were not observed for individuals who self-reported their race as Indigenous. USPSTF criteria had lower sensitivities for lung cancer eligibility. Both PLCOm2012 models had high sensitivities, with higher sensitivity for the model that included race. The PLCOm2012noRace model selected effectively in this population, and screening individuals younger than 50 years did not appear to be justified. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths. Studies show that using low-dose computed tomography scans to screen people who smoke or who used to smoke and are at elevated risk for lung cancer reduces lung cancer deaths. This study of 1565 individuals with lung cancer in South Dakota compared screening eligibility using US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and a lung cancer risk-prediction model (PLCOm2012; from the 2012 Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian [PLCO] Cancer Screening Trial). The model had higher sensitivity and picked more people with lung cancer to screen compared with USPSTF criteria. Eligibility sensitivities were similar for individuals who self-reported as Indigenous versus those who did not between USPSTF criteria and the model.

The National Cancer Institute's Cancer Disparities Research Partnership Program: a unique funding model 20 years later.

The burden of cancer and access to effective treatment are not experienced equally by all in the United States. For underserved populations that often access the health-care system when their cancers are in advanced disease stages, radiation oncology services are essential. In 2001, the National Cancer Institute's (NCI's) Radiation Research Program created and implemented the Cancer Disparities Research Partnership Program (CDRP). CDRP was a pioneering funding model whose goal was to increase participation of medically underserved populations in NCI clinical trials. CDRP's Cooperative Agreement funding supported for awardees the planning, development, and conduct of radiation oncology clinical research in institutions not traditionally involved in NCI-sponsored research and cared for a disproportionate number of medically underserved, health-disparities populations. The awardee secured and provided support for mentorship from 1 of 2 NCI comprehensive cancer centers named in its application. Six CDRP awards were made over two 5-year funding periods ending in 2013, with the end-of-program accomplishments previously reported. With the current focus on addressing equity, diversity, and inclusion, the 6 principal investigators were surveyed, 5 of whom responded about the impact of CDRP on their institutions, communities, and personal career paths. The survey that was emailed included 10 questions on a 5-point Likert scale. It was not possible to collect patient data this long after completion of the program. This article provides a 20-year retrospective of the experiences and observations from those principal investigators that can inform those now planning, building, and implementing equity, diversity, and inclusion programs.

Mobile Web App Intervention to Promote Breast Cancer Screening Among American Indian Women in the Northern Plains: Feasibility and Efficacy Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in the United States and the second leading cause of death for American Indian women. American Indian women have lower rates of breast cancer screening than other racial groups, and disparities in breast cancer mortality and survival rates persist among them. To address this critical need, a culturally appropriate, accessible, and personalized intervention is necessary to promote breast cancer screening among American Indian women. This study used mobile health principles to develop a mobile web app-based mammogram intervention (wMammogram) for American Indian women in a remote, rural community in the Northern Plains. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of the wMammogram intervention, which was designed to motivate American Indian women to undergo breast cancer screening, as compared with the control group, who received an educational brochure. METHODS: Using community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles and a multipronged recruitment strategy in a randomized controlled trial design, we developed the wMammogram intervention. This study involved 122 American Indian women aged between 40 and 70 years, who were randomly assigned to either the intervention group (n=62) or the control group (n=60). Those in the intervention group received personalized and culturally appropriate messages through a mobile web app, while those in the control group received an educational brochure. We measured outcomes such as mammogram receipt, intention to receive breast cancer screening after the intervention, and participants' satisfaction with and acceptance of the intervention. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of women who received the wMammogram intervention (26/62, 42%; P=.009) completed mammograms by the 6-month follow-up than the control group (12/60, 20%). The wMammogram intervention group, compared with the control group, reported significantly higher ratings on perceived effectiveness of the intervention (t120=-5.22; P<.001), increase in knowledge (t120=-4.75; P<.001), and satisfaction with the intervention (t120=-3.61; P<.001). Moreover, compared with the brochure group, the intervention group expressed greater intention to receive a mammogram in the future when it is due (62/62, 100% vs 51/60, 85%) and were more willing to recommend the intervention they received to their friends (61/62, 98.4% vs 54/60, 90%) with statistically significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows the feasibility and efficacy of the wMammogram intervention to promote breast cancer screening for American Indian women in a remote, rural community-based setting. Findings suggest that, with advancements in technology and the ubiquity of mobile devices, mobile web apps could serve as a valuable health intervention tool that builds upon low-cost technology and enhances accessibility and sustainability of preventive care to help reduce breast health disparities experienced in hard-to-reach American Indian populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05530603; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05530603.

Great Plains American Indians' Perspectives on Patient and Family Needs Throughout the Cancer Journey.

PURPOSE: To explore the perspectives on patient and family needs during cancer treatment and survivorship of American Indian (AI) cancer survivors, caregivers, Tribal leaders, and healers. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 36 AI cancer survivors from three reservations in the Great Plains region. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: A community-based participatory research design was employed. Postcolonial Indigenous research techniques of talking circles and semistructured interviews were used to gather qualitative data. Data were analyzed using content analysis to identify themes. FINDINGS: The overarching theme of accompaniment was identified. The following themes were intertwined with this theme: (a) the need for home health care, with the subthemes of family support and symptom management; and (b) patient and family education. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: To provide high-quality cancer care to AI patients in their home communities, oncology clinicians should collaborate with local care providers, relevant organizations, and the Indian Health Service to identify and develop essential services. Future efforts must emphasize culturally responsive interventions in which Tribal community health workers serve as navigators to accompany patients and families during treatment and in survivorship.