The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Tobacco Treatment Program Implementation at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted cancer screening and treatment delivery, but COVID-19's impact on tobacco cessation treatment for cancer patients who smoke has not been widely explored. AIMS AND METHODS: We conducted a sequential cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 34 National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers participating in NCI's Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I), across three reporting periods: one prior to COVID-19 (January-June 2019) and two during the pandemic (January-June 2020, January-June 2021). Using McNemar's Test of Homogeneity, we assessed changes in services offered and implementation activities over time. RESULTS: The proportion of centers offering remote treatment services increased each year for Quitline referrals (56%, 68%, and 91%; p = .000), telephone counseling (59%, 79%, and 94%; p = .002), and referrals to Smokefree TXT (27%, 47%, and 56%; p = .006). Centers offering video-based counseling increased from 2020 to 2021 (18% to 59%; p = .006), Fewer than 10% of centers reported laying off tobacco treatment staff. Compared to early 2020, in 2021 C3I centers reported improvements in their ability to maintain staff and clinician morale, refer to external treatment services, train providers to deliver tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a rapid transition to new telehealth program delivery of tobacco treatment for patients with cancer. C3I cancer centers adjusted rapidly to challenges presented by the pandemic, with improvements reported in staff morale and ability to train providers, refer patients to tobacco treatment, and modify clinical workflows. These factors enabled C3I centers to sustain evidence-based tobacco treatment implementation during and beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: This work describes how NCI-designated cancer centers participating in the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) adapted to challenges to sustain evidence-based tobacco use treatment programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. This work offers a model for resilience and rapid transition to remote tobacco treatment services delivery and proposes a policy and research agenda for telehealth services as an approach to sustaining evidence-based tobacco treatment programs.

Smoking Status, Nicotine Medication, Vaccination, and COVID-19 Hospital Outcomes: Findings from the COVID EHR Cohort at the University of Wisconsin (CEC-UW) Study.

INTRODUCTION: Available evidence is mixed concerning associations between smoking status and COVID-19 clinical outcomes. Effects of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and vaccination status on COVID-19 outcomes in smokers are unknown. METHODS: Electronic health record data from 104 590 COVID-19 patients hospitalized February 1, 2020 to September 30, 2021 in 21 U.S. health systems were analyzed to assess associations of smoking status, in-hospital NRT prescription, and vaccination status with in-hospital death and ICU admission. RESULTS: Current (n = 7764) and never smokers (n = 57 454) did not differ on outcomes after adjustment for age, sex, race, ethnicity, insurance, body mass index, and comorbidities. Former (vs never) smokers (n = 33 101) had higher adjusted odds of death (aOR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06-1.17) and ICU admission (aOR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.11). Among current smokers, NRT prescription was associated with reduced mortality (aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.50-0.82). Vaccination effects were significantly moderated by smoking status; vaccination was more strongly associated with reduced mortality among current (aOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.16-0.66) and former smokers (aOR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.39-0.57) than for never smokers (aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.57, 0.79). Vaccination was associated with reduced ICU admission more strongly among former (aOR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.66-0.83) than never smokers (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.79-0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Former but not current smokers hospitalized with COVID-19 are at higher risk for severe outcomes. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is associated with better hospital outcomes in COVID-19 patients, especially current and former smokers. NRT during COVID-19 hospitalization may reduce mortality for current smokers. IMPLICATIONS: Prior findings regarding associations between smoking and severe COVID-19 disease outcomes have been inconsistent. This large cohort study suggests potential beneficial effects of nicotine replacement therapy on COVID-19 outcomes in current smokers and outsized benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in current and former smokers. Such findings may influence clinical practice and prevention efforts and motivate additional research that explores mechanisms for these effects.

Searching for Survivor-Specific Services at NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers: A Qualitative Assessment.

Background: Cancer survivorship presents unique medical, psychosocial, and logistical challenges for survivors, their caregivers, and clinicians. NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers (CCCs) serve a unique role in the delivery of cancer care because they not only provide care but also serve as a model for community oncologists and clinics through the development and dissemination of standards of care. Survivors, their caregivers, and clinicians look to CCCs to provide information about how to navigate the transition from active to posttreatment care. However, there is wide variability in the types of resources CCCs make available on their websites. The goal of our assessment was to understand the types of posttreatment survivor-specific resources CCCs are providing on their website. Methods: We analyzed the websites of the 47 CCCs to evaluate survivor-specific resources around the 4 components of survivorship care described by the Institute of Medicine guidelines for survivorship care plans: surveillance, prevention, intervention, and coordination. Results: Of the 47 CCCs, 74.5% (n=35) had discoverable survivor-specific services on their websites. Despite our inclusive approach to coding, few websites contained extensive information targeted at survivors, their caregivers, or clinicians. Only the coordination and intervention elements were discussed by at least half of the CCCs. From the vantage point of cancer survivors, their lay caregivers, loved ones, or clinicians, there is limited information about survivor-specific services on the websites of the 47 CCCs. This dearth of information translates into substantial work for these groups to find the resources they may need. Conclusions: The CCCs have an opportunity to serve as information hubs and to lessen the amount of work associated with survivorship. As models of cancer care delivery, the CCCs can also set the standard for community oncologists and clinics for delivery of care that improves the quality of life for survivors.

Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents.

BACKGROUND: Overweight and obesity are increasing worldwide. To help assess their relevance to mortality in different populations we conducted individual-participant data meta-analyses of prospective studies of body-mass index (BMI), limiting confounding and reverse causality by restricting analyses to never-smokers and excluding pre-existing disease and the first 5 years of follow-up. METHODS: Of 10 625 411 participants in Asia, Australia and New Zealand, Europe, and North America from 239 prospective studies (median follow-up 13·7 years, IQR 11·4-14·7), 3 951 455 people in 189 studies were never-smokers without chronic diseases at recruitment who survived 5 years, of whom 385 879 died. The primary analyses are of these deaths, and study, age, and sex adjusted hazard ratios (HRs), relative to BMI 22·5-<25·0 kg/m(2). FINDINGS: All-cause mortality was minimal at 20·0-25·0 kg/m(2) (HR 1·00, 95% CI 0·98-1·02 for BMI 20·0-<22·5 kg/m(2); 1·00, 0·99-1·01 for BMI 22·5-<25·0 kg/m(2)), and increased significantly both just below this range (1·13, 1·09-1·17 for BMI 18·5-<20·0 kg/m(2); 1·51, 1·43-1·59 for BMI 15·0-<18·5) and throughout the overweight range (1·07, 1·07-1·08 for BMI 25·0-<27·5 kg/m(2); 1·20, 1·18-1·22 for BMI 27·5-<30·0 kg/m(2)). The HR for obesity grade 1 (BMI 30·0-<35·0 kg/m(2)) was 1·45, 95% CI 1·41-1·48; the HR for obesity grade 2 (35·0-<40·0 kg/m(2)) was 1·94, 1·87-2·01; and the HR for obesity grade 3 (40·0-<60·0 kg/m(2)) was 2·76, 2·60-2·92. For BMI over 25·0 kg/m(2), mortality increased approximately log-linearly with BMI; the HR per 5 kg/m(2) units higher BMI was 1·39 (1·34-1·43) in Europe, 1·29 (1·26-1·32) in North America, 1·39 (1·34-1·44) in east Asia, and 1·31 (1·27-1·35) in Australia and New Zealand. This HR per 5 kg/m(2) units higher BMI (for BMI over 25 kg/m(2)) was greater in younger than older people (1·52, 95% CI 1·47-1·56, for BMI measured at 35-49 years vs 1·21, 1·17-1·25, for BMI measured at 70-89 years; pheterogeneity<0·0001), greater in men than women (1·51, 1·46-1·56, vs 1·30, 1·26-1·33; pheterogeneity<0·0001), but similar in studies with self-reported and measured BMI. INTERPRETATION: The associations of both overweight and obesity with higher all-cause mortality were broadly consistent in four continents. This finding supports strategies to combat the entire spectrum of excess adiposity in many populations. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council, British Heart Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, US National Institutes of Health.

Toward Rigorous Data Harmonization in Cancer Epidemiology Research: One Approach.

Cancer epidemiologists have a long history of combining data sets in pooled analyses, often harmonizing heterogeneous data from multiple studies into 1 large data set. Although there are useful websites on data harmonization with recommendations and support, there is little research on best practices in data harmonization; each project conducts harmonization according to its own internal standards. The field would be greatly served by charting the process of data harmonization to enhance the quality of the harmonized data. Here, we describe the data harmonization process utilized at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (Seattle, Washington) by the coordinating centers of several research projects. We describe a 6-step harmonization process, including: 1) identification of questions the harmonized data set is required to answer; 2) identification of high-level data concepts to answer those questions; 3) assessment of data availability for data concepts; 4) development of common data elements for each data concept; 5) mapping and transformation of individual data points to common data elements; and 6) quality-control procedures. Our aim here is not to claim a "correct" way of doing data harmonization but to encourage others to describe their processes in order that we can begin to create rigorous approaches. We also propose a research agenda around this issue.

Associations of body mass index, smoking, and alcohol consumption with prostate cancer mortality in the Asia Cohort Consortium.

Many potentially modifiable risk factors for prostate cancer are also associated with prostate cancer screening, which may induce a bias in epidemiologic studies. We investigated the associations of body mass index (weight (kg)/height (m)(2)), smoking, and alcohol consumption with risk of fatal prostate cancer in Asian countries where prostate cancer screening is not widely utilized. Analysis included 18 prospective cohort studies conducted during 1963-2006 across 6 countries in southern and eastern Asia that are part of the Asia Cohort Consortium. Body mass index, smoking, and alcohol intake were determined by questionnaire at baseline, and cause of death was ascertained through death certificates. Analysis included 522,736 men aged 54 years, on average, at baseline. During 4.8 million person-years of follow-up, there were 634 prostate cancer deaths (367 prostate cancer deaths across the 11 cohorts with alcohol data). In Cox proportional hazards analyses of all cohorts in the Asia Cohort Consortium, prostate cancer mortality was not significantly associated with obesity (body mass index >25: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85, 1.36), ever smoking (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.84, 1.21), or heavy alcohol intake (HR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.74, 1.35). Differences in prostate cancer screening and detection probably contribute to differences in the association of obesity, smoking, or alcohol intake with prostate cancer risk and mortality between Asian and Western populations and thus require further investigation.

Burden of total and cause-specific mortality related to tobacco smoking among adults aged ≥ 45 years in Asia: a pooled analysis of 21 cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking is a major risk factor for many diseases. We sought to quantify the burden of tobacco-smoking-related deaths in Asia, in parts of which men's smoking prevalence is among the world's highest. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed pooled analyses of data from 1,049,929 participants in 21 cohorts in Asia to quantify the risks of total and cause-specific mortality associated with tobacco smoking using adjusted hazard ratios and their 95% confidence intervals. We then estimated smoking-related deaths among adults aged ≥45 y in 2004 in Bangladesh, India, mainland China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan-accounting for ∼71% of Asia's total population. An approximately 1.44-fold (95% CI = 1.37-1.51) and 1.48-fold (1.38-1.58) elevated risk of death from any cause was found in male and female ever-smokers, respectively. In 2004, active tobacco smoking accounted for approximately 15.8% (95% CI = 14.3%-17.2%) and 3.3% (2.6%-4.0%) of deaths, respectively, in men and women aged ≥45 y in the seven countries/regions combined, with a total number of estimated deaths of ∼1,575,500 (95% CI = 1,398,000-1,744,700). Among men, approximately 11.4%, 30.5%, and 19.8% of deaths due to cardiovascular diseases, cancer, and respiratory diseases, respectively, were attributable to tobacco smoking. Corresponding proportions for East Asian women were 3.7%, 4.6%, and 1.7%, respectively. The strongest association with tobacco smoking was found for lung cancer: a 3- to 4-fold elevated risk, accounting for 60.5% and 16.7% of lung cancer deaths, respectively, in Asian men and East Asian women aged ≥45 y. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco smoking is associated with a substantially elevated risk of mortality, accounting for approximately 2 million deaths in adults aged ≥45 y throughout Asia in 2004. It is likely that smoking-related deaths in Asia will continue to rise over the next few decades if no effective smoking control programs are implemented. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Association between body-mass index and risk of death in more than 1 million Asians.

BACKGROUND: Most studies that have evaluated the association between the body-mass index (BMI) and the risks of death from any cause and from specific causes have been conducted in populations of European origin. METHODS: We performed pooled analyses to evaluate the association between BMI and the risk of death among more than 1.1 million persons recruited in 19 cohorts in Asia. The analyses included approximately 120,700 deaths that occurred during a mean follow-up period of 9.2 years. Cox regression models were used to adjust for confounding factors. RESULTS: In the cohorts of East Asians, including Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans, the lowest risk of death was seen among persons with a BMI (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) in the range of 22.6 to 27.5. The risk was elevated among persons with BMI levels either higher or lower than that range--by a factor of up to 1.5 among those with a BMI of more than 35.0 and by a factor of 2.8 among those with a BMI of 15.0 or less. A similar U-shaped association was seen between BMI and the risks of death from cancer, from cardiovascular diseases, and from other causes. In the cohorts comprising Indians and Bangladeshis, the risks of death from any cause and from causes other than cancer or cardiovascular disease were increased among persons with a BMI of 20.0 or less, as compared with those with a BMI of 22.6 to 25.0, whereas there was no excess risk of either death from any cause or cause-specific death associated with a high BMI. CONCLUSIONS: Underweight was associated with a substantially increased risk of death in all Asian populations. The excess risk of death associated with a high BMI, however, was seen among East Asians but not among Indians and Bangladeshis.

Competencies supporting high-performance translational teams: A review of the SciTS evidence base.

A translational team (TT) is a specific type of interdisciplinary team that seeks to improve human health. Because high-performing TTs are critical to accomplishing CTSA goals, a greater understanding of how to promote TT performance is needed. Previous work by a CTSA Workgroup formulated a taxonomy of 5 interrelated team-emergent competency "domains" for successful translation: 1). affect, 2). communication, 3). management, 4). collaborative problem-solving, and 5). leadership. These Knowledge Skills and Attitudes (KSAs) develop within teams from the team's interactions. However, understanding how practice in these domains enhance team performance was unaddressed. To fill this gap, we conducted a scoping literature review of empirical team studies from the broader Science of Team Science literature domains. We identified specific team-emergent KSAs that enhance TT performance, mapped these to the earlier "domain" taxonomy, and developed a rubric for their assessment. This work identifies important areas of intersection of practices in specific competencies across other competency domains. We find that inclusive environment, openness to transdisciplinary knowledge sharing, and situational leadership are a core triad of team-emergent competencies that reinforce each other and are highly linked to team performance. Finally, we identify strategies for enhancing these competencies. This work provides a grounded approach for training interventions in the CTSA context.

Evaluation of a clinical and translational research initiative: Developing and implementing a collaborative evaluation process in CAIRIBU.

Funding for large research initiatives, such as those funded through the National Institutes of Health U mechanism, has increased since 2010; however, there is little published research on how to evaluate the success of such initiatives. Here, we describe the collaborative evaluation planning process undertaken by the Interactions Core of the Collaborating for the Advancement of Interdisciplinary Research in Benign Urology (CAIRIBU) research community, a clinical and translational research initiative funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. Evaluation is necessary to measure the impact of our work and to allow for continuous improvement efforts of CAIRIBU activities and initiatives. We developed and implemented an iterative seven-step process that engaged the Interactions Core, NIDDK program staff, and grantees at each step of the planning process. Challenges faced in planning and implementing the evaluation plan included the time burden on investigators to submit new data for evaluations, finite time and resources for evaluation work, and the development of infrastructure for the evaluation plan. We call on funding agencies to include more explicit requirements for evaluation participation from grantees, as well as dedicated funding to support the evaluation process, in future funding opportunity announcements for large research consortia.

Freelance information management agents: why information management is so hard on translational teams.

Introduction: To conduct high-quality, rigorous research, and advance scientific knowledge, Translational Teams (TTs) engage in information behaviors, including seeking, using, creating, sharing, storing, and retrieving information, in ways specific to the translational context. Currently, little is known about TTs' approach to information management. This qualitative pilot study explored how TTs at the University of Wisconsin-Madison interact with information, as well as the scientific and organizational impact of their interactions. Methods: We conducted interviews with ten members of UW TTs. Interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Four themes emerged: (1) TT members did not recognize the centrality of information or information behaviors to their scientific work; (2) TT members engaged in similar information behaviors and used similar tools across disciplines and topics; (3) TT members did not receive support or guidance from their institution in managing information; and (4) Individualized choices of TT members conflicted at the team level, causing confusion and increasing the potential for data and information loss. Acting as freelance information management agents, TT members made individualized decisions about what tools to use and how to use them, often in a piecemeal manner and without communicating these decisions to other team members. Conclusion: Research institutions should both encourage teams to discuss their information management approaches at the beginning of a project and provide leaders with training on how to have these conversations and what topics should be included. Additionally, institutions can provide researchers with guidelines for using software platforms to help mitigate information management challenges.

Toward a translational team science hierarchy of needs: Exploring the information management challenges of team science.

Background: Clinical and Translational Research (CTR) requires a team-based approach, with successful teams engaging in skilled management and use of information. Yet we know little about the ways that Translational Teams (TTs) engage with information across the lifecycle of CTR projects. This qualitative study explored the challenges that information management imposes on the conduct of team-based CTR. Methods: We conducted interviews with ten members of TTs at University of Wisconsin. Interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was conducted. Results: TTs' piecemeal and reactive approaches to information management created conflict within the team and slowed scientific progress. The lack of cohesive information management strategies made it more difficult for teams to develop strong team processes like communication, scientific coordination, and project management. While TTs' research was hindered by the institutional challenges of interdisciplinary team information sharing, TTs who had developed shared approaches to information management that foregrounded transparency, accountability, and trust, described substantial benefits to their teamwork. Conclusion: We propose a new model for the Science of Team Science field - a Translational Team Science Hierarchy of Needs - that suggests interventions should be targeted at the appropriate stage of team development in order to maximize a team's scientific potential.

Developing a Translational Team Training Program using the Wisconsin Interventions in Team Science Framework.

The Clinical and Translational Science Awards (CTSA) Program supports a national network of medical research institutions working to improve the translational process. High-performing translational teams (TTs) are critical for advancing evidence-based approaches that improve human health. When focused on content-appropriate knowledge, skills, and attitudes, targeted training results in the substantial internalization of training content, producing new skills that can be applied to improve team outputs, outcomes, and benefits. More rigorous approaches to develop, test, and evaluate interventions are needed, and we used the Wisconsin Interventions in Team Science framework as a model to systematize our efforts. We designed, built, and tested a five-session TT Training Program for translational researchers. The 90-minute sessions were pilot-tested with 47 postdoctoral fellows and evaluated through a structured evaluation plan. Ninety-five percent of post-session survey respondents indicated that the content and skills provided would make them more effective collaborators, and one hundred percent would recommend the sessions to colleagues. Respondents' scores increased from pretest to posttest for most learning outcomes. Refinements from participant feedback are described. This work provides a foundation for the continued evolution of evidence-based training programs in the CTSA environment.

Temporal development of high-performance translational teams.

Successful translation involves the coupled application of knowledge-generating research with product development to advance a device, drug, diagnostic, or evidence-based intervention for clinical adoption to improve human health. Critical to the success of the CTSA consortium, translation can be more effectively accomplished by training approaches that focus on improving team-emergent knowledge skills and attitudes (KSAs) linked to performance. We earlier identified 15 specific evidence-informed, team-emergent competencies that facilitate translational team (TT) performance. Here, we examine the SciTS literature describing developmental, temporal dynamics, and adaptive learning stages of interdisciplinary teams and integrate these with real-world observations on TT maturation pathways. We propose that TTs undergo ordered developmental phases, each representing a learning cycle that we call Formation, Knowledge Generation, and Translation. We identify major activities of each phase linked to development goals. Transition to subsequent phases is associated with a team learning cycle, resulting in adaptations that enabling progression towards clinical translation. We present known antecedents of stage-dependent competencies and rubrics for their assessment. Application of this model will ease assessment, facilitate goal identification and align relevant training interventions to improve performance of TTs in the CTSA context.

Team Science Principles Enhance Cancer Care Delivery Quality Improvement: Interdisciplinary Implementation of Breast Cancer Screening Shared Decision Making.

PURPOSE: Implementing shared decision making (SDM), recommended in screening mammography by national guidelines for women age 40-49 years, faces challenges that innovations in quality improvement and team science (TS) are poised to address. We aimed to improve the effectiveness, patient-centeredness, and efficiency of SDM in primary care for breast cancer screening. METHODS: Our interdisciplinary team included primary and specialty care, psychology, epidemiology, communication science, engineering, and stakeholders (patients and clinicians). Over a 6-year period, we executed two iterative cycles of plan-do-study-act (PDSA) to develop, revise, and implement a SDM tool using TS principles. Patient and physician surveys and retrospective analysis of tool performance informed our first PDSA cycle. Patient and physician surveys, toolkit use, and clinical outcomes in the second PDSA cycle supported SDM implementation. We gathered team member assessments on the importance of individual TS activities. RESULTS: Our first PDSA cycle successfully generated a SDM tool called Breast Cancer Risk Estimator, deemed valuable by 87% of patients surveyed. Our second PDSA cycle increased Breast Cancer Risk Estimator utilization, from 2,000 sessions in 2017 to 4,097 sessions in 2019 while maintaining early-stage breast cancer diagnoses. Although TS activities such as culture, trust, and communication needed to be sustained throughout the project, shared goals, research/data infrastructure support, and leadership were more important earlier in the project and persisted in the later stages of the project. CONCLUSION: Combining rigorous quality improvement and TS principles can support the complex, interdependent, and interdisciplinary activities necessary to improve cancer care delivery exemplified by our implementation of a breast cancer screening SDM tool.

Using information technology to integrate tobacco use treatment in routine oncology care: Lessons learned from the U.S. Cancer Center Cessation Initiative Cancer Centers.

Background: Cancer patients who receive evidence-based tobacco-dependence treatment are more likely to quit and remain abstinent, but tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) are not consistently offered. In 2017, the U.S. National Cancer Institute, through the Cancer Moonshot, funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I). C3I supports 52 cancer centers to implement and expand evidence-based tobacco treatment in routine oncology care. Integration into routine care involves the use of health information technology (IT), including modifying electronic health records and clinical workflows. Here, we examine C3I cancer centers' IT leadership involvement and experiences in tobacco-dependence treatment implementation. Method: This qualitative study of C3I-funded cancer centers integrated data from online surveys and in-person, semistructured interviews with IT leaders. We calculated descriptive statistics of survey data and applied content analysis to interview transcripts. Results: Themes regarding IT personnel included suggestions to involve IT early, communicate regularly, understand the roles and influence of the IT team, and match program design with IT funding and resources. Themes regarding electronic health record (EHR) modifications included beginning modifications early to account for long lead time to make changes, working with IT to identify and adapt existing EHR tools for TTP or designing tools that will support a desired workflow developed with end-users, and working with IT personnel to make sure TTPs comply with system and state policies (e.g., privacy laws). Conclusions: The experiences of C3I cancer centers regarding the use of health IT to enhance tobacco-dependence treatment program implementation can guide cancer centers and community oncology practices to potentially enhance TTP implementation and patient outcomes.

Almost a quarter of patients first diagnosed with cancer report current cigarette smoking. There are tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) that effectively help patients quit smoking to improve cancer treatment response, survival, and quality-of-life. In 2017, the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) funded the Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) and supported 52 cancer centers to implement these TTPs. A key component of these programs is the information technology (IT) necessary to refer patients to the program and document their progress. As coordinators of C3I, our team conducted interviews with IT leaders at these cancer centers to learn about the implementation of the programs. IT leaders suggested that IT teams be involved early in the program implementation process and that leaders communicate with the IT team regularly to address necessary changes to referral and documentation systems. IT teams are important to involve early and regularly throughout the TTP implementation process because they have unique knowledge of how funding, policy, and existing technological tools will impact the implementation and success of the program. Our findings emphasize the importance of involving IT teams early in the planning process for such programs. Studies such as this focusing on the experiences and knowledge of specific team members, such as the IT team, enhance tobacco-dependence treatment program implementation and can guide cancer centers and community oncology practices to implement these programs to improve patient outcomes.

Application of team science best practices to the project management of a large, multi-site lung cancer screening research consortium.

Research is increasingly conducted through multi-institutional consortia, and best practices for establishing multi-site research collaborations must be employed to ensure efficient, effective, and productive translational research teams. In this manuscript, we describe how the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Research Center (PROSPR-Lung) utilized evidence-based Science of Team Science (SciTS) best practices to establish the consortium's infrastructure and processes to promote translational research in lung cancer screening. We provide specific, actionable examples of how we: (1) developed and reinforced a shared mission, vision, and goals; (2) maintained a transparent and representative leadership structure; (3) employed strong research support systems; (4) provided efficient and effective data management; (5) promoted interdisciplinary conversations; and (6) built a culture of trust. We offer guidance for managing a multi-site research center and data repository that may be applied to a variety of settings. Finally, we detail specific project management tools and processes used to drive collaboration, efficiency, and scientific productivity.

Integrating Tobacco Treatment Into Oncology Care: Reach and Effectiveness of Evidence-Based Tobacco Treatment Across National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

PURPOSE: Quitting smoking improves patients' clinical outcomes, yet smoking is not commonly addressed as part of cancer care. The Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) supports National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers to integrate tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) into routine cancer care. C3I centers vary in size, implementation strategies used, and treatment approaches. We examined associations of these contextual factors with treatment reach and smoking cessation effectiveness. METHODS: This cross-sectional study used survey data from 28 C3I centers that reported tobacco treatment data during the first 6 months of 2021. Primary outcomes of interest were treatment reach (reach)-the proportion of patients identified as currently smoking who received at least one evidence-based tobacco treatment component (eg, counseling and pharmacotherapy)-and smoking cessation effectiveness (effectiveness)-the proportion of patients reporting 7-day point prevalence abstinence at 6-month follow-up. Center-level differences in reach and effectiveness were examined by center characteristics, implementation strategies, and tobacco treatment components. RESULTS: Of the total 692,662 unique patients seen, 44,437 reported current smoking. Across centers, a median of 96% of patients were screened for tobacco use, median smoking prevalence was 7.4%, median reach was 15.4%, and median effectiveness was 18.4%. Center-level characteristics associated with higher reach included higher smoking prevalence, use of center-wide TTP, and lower patient-to-tobacco treatment specialist ratio. Higher effectiveness was observed at centers that served a larger overall population and population of patients who smoke, reported a higher smoking prevalence, and/or offered electronic health record referrals via a closed-loop system. CONCLUSION: Whole-center TTP implementation among inpatients and outpatients, and increasing staff-to-patient ratios may improve TTP reach. Designating personnel with tobacco treatment expertise and resources to increase tobacco treatment dose or intensity may improve smoking cessation effectiveness.

Data envelopment analysis to evaluate the efficiency of tobacco treatment programs in the NCI Moonshot Cancer Center Cessation Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The Cancer Center Cessation Initiative (C3I) is a National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Moonshot Program that supports NCI-designated cancer centers developing tobacco treatment programs for oncology patients who smoke. C3I-funded centers implement evidence-based programs that offer various smoking cessation treatment components (e.g., counseling, Quitline referrals, access to medications). While evaluation of implementation outcomes in C3I is guided by evaluation of reach and effectiveness (via RE-AIM), little is known about technical efficiency-i.e., how inputs (e.g., program costs, staff time) influence implementation outcomes (e.g., reach, effectiveness). This study demonstrates the application of data envelopment analysis (DEA) as an implementation science tool to evaluate technical efficiency of C3I programs and advance prioritization of implementation resources. METHODS: DEA is a linear programming technique widely used in economics and engineering for assessing relative performance of production units. Using data from 16 C3I-funded centers reported in 2020, we applied input-oriented DEA to model technical efficiency (i.e., proportion of observed outcomes to benchmarked outcomes for given input levels). The primary models used the constant returns-to-scale specification and featured cost-per-participant, total full-time equivalent (FTE) effort, and tobacco treatment specialist effort as model inputs and reach and effectiveness (quit rates) as outcomes. RESULTS: In the DEA model featuring cost-per-participant (input) and reach/effectiveness (outcomes), average constant returns-to-scale technical efficiency was 25.66 (SD = 24.56). When stratified by program characteristics, technical efficiency was higher among programs in cohort 1 (M = 29.15, SD = 28.65, n = 11) vs. cohort 2 (M = 17.99, SD = 10.16, n = 5), with point-of-care (M = 33.90, SD = 28.63, n = 9) vs. no point-of-care services (M = 15.59, SD = 14.31, n = 7), larger (M = 33.63, SD = 30.38, n = 8) vs. smaller center size (M = 17.70, SD = 15.00, n = 8), and higher (M = 29.65, SD = 30.99, n = 8) vs. lower smoking prevalence (M = 21.67, SD = 17.21, n = 8). CONCLUSION: Most C3I programs assessed were technically inefficient relative to the most efficient center benchmark and may be improved by optimizing the use of inputs (e.g., cost-per-participant) relative to program outcomes (e.g., reach, effectiveness). This study demonstrates the appropriateness and feasibility of using DEA to evaluate the relative performance of evidence-based programs.

Relations of Current and Past Cancer with Severe Outcomes among 104,590 Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: The COVID EHR Cohort at the University of Wisconsin.

BACKGROUND: There is mixed evidence about the relations of current versus past cancer with severe COVID-19 outcomes and how they vary by patient and cancer characteristics. METHODS: Electronic health record data of 104,590 adult hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were obtained from 21 United States health systems from February 2020 through September 2021. In-hospital mortality and ICU admission were predicted from current and past cancer diagnoses. Moderation by patient characteristics, vaccination status, cancer type, and year of the pandemic was examined. RESULTS: 6.8% of the patients had current (n = 7,141) and 6.5% had past (n = 6,749) cancer diagnoses. Current cancer predicted both severe outcomes but past cancer did not; adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality were 1.58 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-1.70] and 1.04 (95% CI, 0.96-1.13), respectively. Mortality rates decreased over the pandemic but the incremental risk of current cancer persisted, with the increment being larger among younger vs. older patients. Prior COVID-19 vaccination reduced mortality generally and among those with current cancer (aOR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53-0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Current cancer, especially among younger patients, posed a substantially increased risk for death and ICU admission among patients with COVID-19; prior COVID-19 vaccination mitigated the risk associated with current cancer. Past history of cancer was not associated with higher risks for severe COVID-19 outcomes for most cancer types. IMPACT: This study clarifies the characteristics that modify the risk associated with cancer on severe COVID-19 outcomes across the first 20 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. See related commentary by Egan et al., p. 3.