A pragmatic randomized trial of mailed fecal immunochemical testing to increase colorectal cancer screening among low-income and minoritized populations.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused, particularly among low-income and minoritized populations, for whom the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged progress in achieving equity. METHODS: A hub-and-spoke model was used. The hub was a nonacademic organization and the spokes were three community health center (CHC) systems overseeing numerous clinic sites. Via a cluster-randomized trial design, nine clinic sites were randomized to intervention and 16 clinic sites were randomized to usual care. Patient-level interventions included invitation letters, mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and call/text-based reminders. Year 1 intervention impact, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, was assessed as the proportion completing screening among individuals not up to date at baseline, which compared intervention and nonintervention clinics accounting for intraclinic cluster variation; confidence intervals (CIs) around differences not including 0 were interpreted as statistically significant. RESULTS: Among 26,736 patients who met eligibility criteria, approximately 58% were female, 55% were Hispanic individuals, and 44% were Spanish speaking. The proportion completing screening was 11.5 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI, 6.1-16.9 ppts) higher in intervention versus usual care clinics. Variation in differences between intervention and usual care clinics was observed by sex (12.6 ppts [95% CI, 7.2-18.0 ppts] for females; 8.8 ppts [95% CI, 4.7-13.9 ppts] for males) and by racial and ethnic group (13.8 ppts [95% CI, 7.0-20.6 ppts] for Hispanic individuals; 13.0 ppts [95% CI, 3.6-22.4 ppts] for Asian individuals; 11.3 ppts [95% CI, 5.8-16.8 ppts] for non-Hispanic White individuals; 6.1 ppts [95% CI, 0.8-10.4 ppts] for Black individuals). CONCLUSIONS: A regional mailed FIT intervention was effective for increasing CRC screening rates across CHC systems serving diverse, low-income populations.

Mental health and social connection among older lesbian and bisexual women.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences in psychosocial and mental health outcomes between older lesbian and bisexual women compared to heterosexual women. DESIGN: Cross sectional study. SETTING: The study was carried out in the California Teachers Study, a prospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: Self-identified heterosexual (n = 35,846), lesbian (n = 710), and bisexual (n = 253) women 50 years of age and older were enrolled. MEASUREMENTS: Validated questionnaires were used to measure social connection, overall happiness, and depression. Logistic regression modeling was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing lesbian and bisexual women separately to heterosexual women in relation to psychosocial and mental health outcomes. RESULTS: After controlling for age and marital status, older bisexual women were significantly more likely to report lack of companionship (OR = 2.00; 95% CI, 1.30-3.12) and feeling left out (OR = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.36-3.97) compared to older heterosexual women. The odds of reporting feeling isolated from others was significantly higher in lesbian (OR = 1.56; 95% CI, 1.06-2.30) and bisexual women (OR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.37-3.87) than in heterosexual women. The OR (95% CI) for reporting not being very happy overall was 1.96 (CI, 1.09-3.52) in bisexual women and 1.40 (0.92-2.14) in lesbian women compared to heterosexual women. The likelihood of reporting diagnosed depression was significantly higher in lesbian women (OR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.38-1.97) and bisexual women (OR = 2.21; 95% CI, 1.67-2.93) compared to heterosexual women. CONCLUSION: Inclusion of lesbian and bisexual women in aging research is essential to understand their unique mental and other health needs, including those specific to bisexual women.

Improved survival in cervical cancer patients receiving care at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced cervical cancer (CC) remains lethal in the United States. We investigate the effect of receiving care at an National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center (NCICC) on survival. METHODS: Data for women diagnosed with CC from 2004 to 2016 who received radiation treatment were extracted from the California Cancer Registry (n = 4250). Cox proportional hazards regression models assessed whether (1) receiving care at NCICCs was associated with risk of CC-specific death, (2) this association remained after multivariable adjustment for age, race/ethnicity, and insurance status, and (3) this association was explained by receipt of guideline-concordant treatment. RESULTS: Median age was 50 years (interquartile range [IQR] 41-61 years), with median follow-up of 2.7 years (IQR 1.3-6.0 years). One-third of patients were seen at an NCICC, and 29% died of CC. The hazard of CC-specific death was reduced by 20% for those receiving care at NCICCs compared with patients receiving care elsewhere (HR = .80; 95% CI, 0.70-0.90). Adjustment for guideline-concordant treatment and other covariates minimally attenuated the association to 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.95), suggesting that the survival advantage associated with care at NCICCs may not be due to receipt of guideline-concordant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates survival benefit for patients receiving care at NCICCs compared with those receiving care elsewhere that is not explained by differences in guideline-concordant care. Structural, organizational, or provider characteristics and differences in patients receiving care at centers with and without NCI designation could explain observed associations. Further understanding of these factors will promote equality across oncology care facilities and survival equity for patients with CC.

Age-related differences in breast cancer mortality according to race/ethnicity, insurance, and socioeconomic status.

BACKGROUND: We assessed breast cancer mortality in older versus younger women according to race/ethnicity, neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), and health insurance status. METHODS: The study included female breast cancer cases 18 years of age and older, diagnosed between 2005 and 2015 in the California Cancer Registry. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling was used to generate hazard ratios (HR) of breast cancer specific deaths and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for older (60+ years) versus younger (< 60 years) patients separately by race/ethnicity, nSES, and health insurance status. RESULTS: Risk of dying from breast cancer was higher in older than younger patients after multivariable adjustment, which varied in magnitude by race/ethnicity (P-interaction< 0.0001). Comparing older to younger patients, higher mortality differences were shown for non-Hispanic White (HR = 1.43; 95% CI, 1.36-1.51) and Hispanic women (HR = 1.37; 95% CI, 1.26-1.50) and lower differences for non-Hispanic Blacks (HR = 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31) and Asians/Pacific Islanders (HR = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.31). HRs comparing older to younger patients varied by insurance status (P-interaction< 0.0001), with largest mortality differences observed for privately insured women (HR = 1.51; 95% CI, 1.43-1.59) and lowest in Medicaid/military/other public insurance (HR = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.10-1.26). No age differences were shown for uninsured women. HRs comparing older to younger patients were similar across nSES strata. CONCLUSION: Our results provide evidence for the continued disparity in Black-White breast cancer mortality, which is magnified in younger women. Moreover, insurance status continues to play a role in breast cancer mortality, with uninsured women having the highest risk for breast cancer death, regardless of age.

Contribution of clinical and socioeconomic factors to differences in breast cancer subtype and mortality between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women.

PURPOSE: To assess tumor subtype distribution and the relative contribution of clinical and sociodemographic factors on breast cancer survival between Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites (NHWs). METHODS: We analyzed data from the California Cancer Registry, which included 29,626 Hispanic and 99,862 NHW female invasive breast cancer cases diagnosed from 2004 to 2014. Logistic regression was used to assess ethnic differences in tumor subtype, and Cox proportional hazard modeling to assess differences in breast cancer survival. RESULTS: Hispanics compared to NHWs had higher odds of having triple-negative (OR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.23-1.35) and HER2-overexpressing tumors (OR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.14-1.25 [HR-] and OR = 1.39; 95% CI 1.31-1.48 [HR+]). In adjusted models, Hispanic women had a higher risk of breast cancer mortality than NHW women (mortality rate ratio [MRR] = 1.24; 95% CI 1.19-1.28). Clinical factors accounted for most of the mortality difference (MRR = 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09); however, neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) and health insurance together accounted for all of the mortality difference (MRR = 1.01; 95% CI 0.97-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: Addressing SES disparities, including increasing access to health care, may be critical to overcoming poorer breast cancer outcomes in Hispanics.

Women's Impression of the Expected Breast Appearance and its Association with Breast Cancer Operations.

BACKGROUND: Significant concern exists from clinicians in all fields that rates of bilateral mastectomy and prophylactic mastectomy are increasing. This study was performed to evaluate women's perception of breast appearance and its association with breast cancer operations. METHODS: From April 2012 to May 2013, all women attending a breast clinic were shown two breast pictures, "natural" and "augmented," and asked which photograph represented the current expected appearance of breasts. Among breast cancer patients, the choice of breast cancer operation was correlated with picture selection. RESULTS: Of 1,177 consecutive women, mean age was 45 years. Overall, 70 % of patients felt that the augmented appearance is expected. This impression was seen in all racial/ethnic groups: non-Hispanic White 65 %, African American 67 %, Hispanic 71 %, and other groups 70 %. Younger age was strongly associated with the augmented appearance (p < 0.0001). Patients older than age 60 years selected the augmented appearance only 51 % of the time. This percentage increased with each younger decade with patients younger than 40 years selecting the augmented appearance in 85 %. Among breast cancer patients, augmented appearance selection was more likely for patients who underwent reconstruction (92 %; p < 0.001), as well as for those undergoing bilateral mastectomy (74 %; p = 0.057) compared with mastectomy alone (49 %). CONCLUSIONS: Most women felt that the augmented appearance of breasts is currently expected, and this impression was more common in young women. This impression may be another factor contributing to the current trend of more extensive breast cancer operations and implant-based reconstructions.

Distribution of COVID-19 Home Testing Through Community Health Centers: Results of the COVID CoNOce MÁS Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess acceptability and feasibility of rapid at-home COVID-19 testing and reporting of test results among individuals seeking care at community health centers (CHCs) and their household members. METHODS: Participants were recruited from 2 Community Health Centers during a clinic visit or a community event. Over-the-counter COVID-19 tests were distributed to participants for self-testing and to offer testing to household members. Separate surveys were administered to collect baseline information on the study participant and to collect test results on the study participant and household members. We calculated the proportion of individuals who agreed to complete COVID home testing, those who reported test results, and the test positivity. For household members, we calculated the proportion who completed and reported results and the positivity rate. We assessed reasons for undergoing COVID-19 testing and the action taken by participants who reported positive tests. RESULTS: A total of 2189 individuals were approached by CHC staff for participation and 1013 (46.3%) agreed to participate. Among the 959 participants with complete sociodemographic data, 88% were Hispanic and 82.6% were female. The proportion providing test results was 36.2% and the test positivity was 4.2%. Among the 1927 test reports, 35.3% for the index participant and 64.4% were for household members. The largest proportion of test results were for index participants (35.3%) and the second largest was for the participant's children (32.1%), followed by parents (16.9%), and spouse/partner (13.2%). The 2 most common reasons for testing were symptoms (29%) and attending family gatherings (26%). Among test-positive individuals (n = 80), most (83.3%) noted that they isolated but only 16.3% called their provider and 1.3% visited a clinic. CONCLUSION: Our results show interest in at-home COVID-19 testing of multiple household members, as we headed into the endemic phase of the pandemic. However, reporting of test results was modest and among test-positive individuals, reporting results to a provider was very low. These results underscore the challenges with reporting and following guidelines among people undergoing home testing for COVID-19, which may have implications for future pandemics.

HPV Vaccine Misperceptions Among Hispanics/Latinos in Southern California.

BACKGROUND: Cervical and other vaccine-preventable HPV-associated cancers disproportionately impact Hispanic/Latinos in the USA. HPV vaccine uptake may be impacted by community agreement with common HPV vaccine misperceptions. It is unknown whether Hispanics/Latinos have a greater agreement with these misperceptions relative to non-Hispanic whites. METHODS: HPV vaccine misperceptions were assessed through a 12-item Likert scale included in a population health assessment mailed to households in the southwest United States. Linear regression models assessed the association between identifying as Hispanic/Latino and summed misperception score. RESULTS: Among the 407 individuals in the analytic sample, 111 (27.3%) were Hispanic/Latino and 296 (72.7%) were non-Hispanic white. On average, Hispanics/Latinos had a 3.03-point higher HPV vaccine misperception sum score relative to non-Hispanic whites, indicating greater agreement with misperceptions (95% confidence interval: 1.16-4.88; p < 0.01). DISCUSSION: Culturally relevant interventions are needed to address HPV vaccine misperceptions among Hispanics/Latinos as part of efforts toward HPV-associated cancer health equity.

Neighborhood Factors Associated with COVID-19 Cases in California.

BACKGROUND: There is a need to assess neighborhood-level factors driving COVID-19 disparities across racial and ethnic groups. OBJECTIVE: To use census tract-level data to investigate neighborhood-level factors contributing to racial and ethnic group-specific COVID-19 case rates in California. DESIGN: Quasi-Poisson generalized linear models were used to identify neighborhood-level factors associated with COVID-19 cases. In separate sequential models for Hispanic, Black, and Asian, we characterized the associations between neighborhood factors on neighborhood COVID-19 cases. Subanalyses were conducted on neighborhoods with majority Hispanic, Black, and Asian residents to identify factors that might be unique to these neighborhoods. Geographically weighted regression using a quasi-Poisson model was conducted to identify regional differences. MAIN MEASURES: All COVID-19 cases and tests reported through January 31, 2021, to the California Department of Public Health. Neighborhood-level data from census tracts were obtained from American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2015-2019), United States Census (2010), and United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. KEY RESULTS: The neighborhood factors associated with COVID-19 case rate were racial and ethnic composition, age, limited English proficiency (LEP), income, household size, and population density. LEP had the largest influence on the positive association between proportion of Hispanic residents and COVID-19 cases (- 2.1% change). This was also true for proportion of Asian residents (- 1.8% change), but not for the proportion of Black residents (- 0.1% change). The influence of LEP was strongest in areas of the Bay Area, Los Angeles, and San Diego. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood-level contextual drivers of COVID-19 burden differ across racial and ethnic groups.

Hub-and-Spoke centralized intervention to optimize colorectal cancer screening and follow-up: A pragmatic, cluster-randomized controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend screening for colorectal cancer (CRC), but participation and abnormal test follow up rates are suboptimal, with disparities by demography. Evidence-based interventions exist to promote screening, but community adoption and implementation are limited. METHODS: The San Diego Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-up through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) program is an academic-community partnership testing regional implementation of a Hub-and-Spoke model for increasing CRC screening and follow-up. The "hub" is a non-academic, non-profit organization that includes 17 community health center (CHC) systems, serving over 190 rural and urban clinic sites. The "spokes" are 3 CHC systems that oversee 11-28 clinics each, totaling over 60 clinics. Using a cluster-randomized trial design, 9 clinics were randomized to intervention and 16 to usual care. Within intervention clinics, approximately 5000 eligible patients not up-to-date with CRC screening per year were identified for intervention. Interventions include an invitation primer, a mailed fecal immunochemical test with completion instructions, and phone and text-based reminders (hub) and patient navigation protocol to promote colonoscopy completion after abnormal FIT (spoke). Outcomes include: 1) proportion of patients up-to-date with screening after three years in intervention versus non-intervention clinics; 2) proportion of patients with abnormal FIT completing colonoscopy within six months of the abnormal result. Implementation science measures are collected to assess acceptability, intervention and usual care adaptations, and sustainability of the intervention strategies. CONCLUSION: This large-scale, regional cluster randomized trial among CHCs serving diverse populations is anticipated to accelerate progress in CRC prevention in underserved populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04941300.

Characteristics of patient navigation programs in the Cancer Moonshot ACCSIS colorectal cancer screening initiative.

BACKGROUND: Although patient navigation has shown promise for increasing participation in colorectal cancer screening and follow-up, little evidence is available to guide implementation of patient navigation in clinical practice. We characterize 8 patient navigation programs being implemented as part of multi-component interventions of the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Moonshot Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening and Follow-Up Through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) initiative. METHODS: We developed a data collection template organized by ACCSIS framework domains. The template was populated by a representative from each of the 8 ACCSIS research projects. We report standardized descriptions of 1) the socio-ecological context in which the navigation program was being conducted, 2) navigation program characteristics, 3) activities undertaken to facilitate program implementation (eg, training), and 4) outcomes used in program evaluation. RESULTS: ACCSIS patient navigation programs varied broadly in their socio-ecological context and settings, the populations they served, and how they were implemented in practice. Six research projects adapted and implemented evidence-based patient navigation programs; the remaining projects developed new programs. Five projects began navigation when patients were due for initial colorectal cancer screening; 3 projects began navigation later in the screening process, when patients were due for follow-up colonoscopy after an abnormal stool-test result. Seven projects relied on existing clinical staff to deliver the navigation; 1 hired a centralized research navigator. All project researchers plan to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of their programs. CONCLUSIONS: Our detailed program descriptions may facilitate cross-project comparisons and guide future implementation and evaluation of patient navigation programs in clinical practice.

Factors that influence mammography use and breast cancer detection among Mexican-American and African-American women.

OBJECTIVE: This study examined factors that influence mammography use and breast cancer detection, including education, health insurance, and acculturation, among Mexican-American (MA) and African-American (AA) women. METHODS: The study included 670 breast cancer cases (388 MAs and 282 AAs), aged 40-86 years at diagnosis. Data on mammography use, detection, and delay in seeking care were collected via questionnaires and medical records. Using a language-based bidimensional acculturation measure, MAs were classified as English-dominant (n = 67), bilingual (n = 173), and Spanish-dominant (n = 148). Mammography prior to diagnosis was assessed by racial/ethnic acculturation subgroup using logistic regression. RESULTS: In age-adjusted models, mammography use was non-significantly lower among English-dominant (OR = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.45-1.59) and bilingual (OR = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.55-1.35) MAs and significantly lower among Spanish-dominant MAs (OR = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.34-0.83) than among AA women. After adjustment for education or insurance, there was no difference in mammography use by race/ethnicity and acculturation subgroup. Despite high self-reported mammography use (75%), a large proportion of cases reported self-detection (59%) and delay in seeking care >90 days (17%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings favor promoting culturally appropriate messaging about the benefits and limitations of mammography, education about breast awareness, and prompt reporting of findings to a health professional.

Equitable COVID-19 Vaccination for Hispanics in the United States: A Success Story from California Border Communities.

The ongoing 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic continues to impact the health of individuals worldwide, including causing pauses in lifesaving cancer screening and prevention measures. From time to time, elective medical procedures, such as those used for cancer screening and early detection, were deferred due to concerns regarding the spread of the infection. The short- and long-term consequences of these temporary measures are concerning, particularly for medically underserved populations, who already experience inequities and disparities related to timely cancer care. Clearly, the way out of this pandemic is by increasing COVID-19 vaccination rates and doing so in an equitable manner so that communities most affected receive preferential access and administration. In this article, we provide a perspective on vaccine equity by featuring the experience of the California Hispanic community, who has been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. We first compared vaccination rates in two United States-Mexico border counties in California (San Diego County and Imperial County) to counties elsewhere in California with a similar Hispanic population size. We show that the border counties have substantially lower unvaccinated proportions of Hispanics compared to other counties. We next looked at county vaccination rates according to the California Healthy Places Index, a health equity metric and found that San Diego and Imperial counties achieved more equitable access and distribution than the rest of the state. Finally, we detail strategies implemented to achieve high and equitable vaccination in this border region, including Imperial County, an agricultural region that was California's epicenter of the COVID-19 crisis at the height of the pandemic. These United States-Mexico border county data show that equitable vaccine access and delivery is possible. Multiple strategies can be used to guide the delivery and access to other public health and cancer preventive services.

Primary care physician compliance with colorectal cancer screening guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To assess self-reported compliance to colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines among primary care physicians (PCPs) and to assess physician and practice characteristics associated with reported compliance. METHODS: Survey data from 984 PCPs in Arizona were used. Self-reported CRC screening practices, recommendations, and compliance with guidelines were assessed. Physician and practice characteristics associated with guideline compliance were also evaluated. RESULTS: While 77.5% of physicians reported using national screening guidelines, only 51.7% reported recommendations consistent with the guidelines. Younger physicians were significantly more likely to report compliance with screening guidelines (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.07-2.10) as were female clinicians (OR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.11-1.92). Physicians practicing in solo (OR = 0.33, 95% CI = 0.19-0.58), group (OR = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.21-0.62), or community health centers (OR = 0.37, 95% CI = 0.17-0.81) were significantly less likely to report following guidelines as compared to those in academic practice. Guideline compliance was higher for fecal occult blood test (FOBT) (65.0%) than colonoscopy (56.7%); overuse of screening for these modalities was reported among 34.4% of physicians. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs are not adequately following CRC screening guidelines. Further studies are needed to clarify the reasons for this lack of compliance, especially as guidelines become more complex.

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Identifying Adaptive Solutions for Colorectal Cancer Screening in Underserved Communities.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically impacted numerous health and economic fronts. Because of the stay-at-home mandate and practice of physical distancing, nearly all preventive care measures have been halted, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The health consequences of this temporary suspension are of great concern, particularly for underserved populations, who experience substantial CRC-related disparities. In this commentary, we describe challenges and opportunities to deliver COVID-19-adapted CRC screening to medically underserved populations receiving care in community health centers (CHC). This perspective is based on key informant interviews with CHC medical directors, teleconference discussions, and strategic planning assessments. To address the unprecedented challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, we identify 2 broad calls to action: invest in CHCs now and support equitable and adaptable telehealth solutions now and in the future. We also recommend 4 CRC-specific calls to action: establish COVID-19-adapted best practices to implement mailed fecal immunochemical test programs, implement grassroots advocacy to identify community gastroenterologists who commit to performing colonoscopies for CHC patients, assess cancer prevention priorities among individuals in underserved communities, and assess regional CRC screening and follow-up barriers and solutions. The COVID-19 pandemic may further exacerbate existing CRC screening disparities in underserved individuals. This will likely lead to delayed diagnosis, a shift to later-stage disease, and increased CRC deaths. To prevent this from happening, we call for timely action and a commitment to address the current extraordinary CRC screening challenges for vulnerable populations.

The Influence of Patient-Provider Language Concordance in Cancer Care: Results of the Hispanic Outcomes by Language Approach (HOLA) Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Delivering linguistically competent care is critical to serving patients who have limited English proficiency (LEP) and represents a key national strategy to help reduce health disparities. Current acceptable standards of communication with patients who have LEP include providers communicating through professional interpretive services or bilingual providers speaking the patients' preferred language directly. This randomized clinical trial tests the effect of patient-provider language concordance on patient satisfaction. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty-three adult Spanish-speaking patients with cancer were randomly assigned to receive care from either (1) 1 of 2 bilingual physicians speaking to the patient directly in Spanish or (2) the same physicians speaking English and using a professional interpreter service. Validated questionnaires were administered to assess patient-reported satisfaction with both provider communication and overall care. Transcripts of initial consultations were analyzed for content variations. RESULTS: Compared with patients receiving care through professional interpretive services, patients cared for in direct Spanish reported significantly improved general satisfaction, technical quality of care (mean composite score [MCS], 4.41 vs 4.06; P = .005), care team interpersonal manner (MCS, 4.37 vs 3.88; P = .004), communication (MCS, 4.50 vs 4.25; P = .018), and time spent with patient,(MCS, 4.30 vs 3.92; P = .028). Specific to physician communication, patients rated direct-Spanish care more highly in perceived opportunity to disclose concerns (MCS 4.91 vs 4.62; P = .001), physician empathy (MCS, 4.94 vs 4.59; P <.001), confidence in physician abilities (MCS, 4.84 vs 4.51; P = .001), and general satisfaction with their physician (MCS, 4.88 vs 4.59; P <.001). Analyzing the content of consultation encounters revealed differences between study arms, with the direct-Spanish arm having more physician speech related to patient history verification (mean number of utterances, 13 vs 9; P = .01) and partnering activities (mean utterances, 16 vs 5; P <.001). Additionally, patients in the direct-Spanish arm were more likely to initiate unprompted speech (mean utterances, 11 vs 3; P <.001) and asked their providers more questions (mean utterances, 11 vs 4; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows improved patient-reported satisfaction among patients with cancer who had LEP and were cared for in direct Spanish compared with interpreter-based communication. Further research into interventions to mitigate the patient-provider language barrier is necessary to optimize care for this population.

Randomized Trial of a Physical Activity Intervention for Latino Men: Activo.

INTRODUCTION: Latino men experience disproportionately high rates of diseases related to low physical activity, yet they are poorly represented in physical activity intervention trials. Efforts to promote physical activity in Latina women show promising results, yet such interventions are yet to be extended to Latino men. This study tested a computer expert system‒tailored, text messaging-supported physical activity intervention for underactive Spanish-speaking Latino men compared with a control group matched for contact time. Potential predictors of intervention success were also explored. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized trial. Participants were randomized to receive a Tailored Physical Activity Intervention (Intervention) or a Wellness Control (Control). Data were collected in 2015-2017 and analyzed in 2018-2019. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Insufficiently active Latino men (n=46). INTERVENTION: Intervention participants received a baseline counseling session and then, individually tailored print materials and text messages on a tapered schedule for 6 months. Control participants received printed wellness materials and text messages on the same schedule. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was a change in weekly moderate to vigorous physical activity from baseline to 6 months measured by accelerometers. Self-reported moderate to vigorous physical activity measured by the 7-day Physical Activity Recall Interview was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: For Intervention participants, median accelerometer-measured moderate to vigorous physical activity increased from 10.0 minutes/week at baseline to 57.5 minutes/week at 6 months, whereas for Control participants, it increased from 21.0 minutes/week at baseline to 23.0 minutes/week at 6 months (p<0.05). Similar results were found for self-reported moderate to vigorous physical activity. At 6 months, 47% of Intervention participants met national guidelines of 150 minutes/week versus 25% of Control participants (p=0.15, not significant). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that an individually tailored intervention can successfully increase moderate to vigorous physical activity in underactive Latino men. Such technology-supported interventions have the potential for broad dissemination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT02512419.

Impact of acculturation on breast cancer treatment and survivorship care among Mexican American patients in Texas.

PURPOSE: Given the increasing number and diversity of cancer survivors in the USA and persistent racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer care, we sought to examine the role of acculturation in adherence to recommended surgical treatment and survivorship care recommendations. METHODS: Study participants included 343 Mexican American women with stage I to III breast cancer who participated in the Ella Binational Breast Cancer Study and were treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, between March 2007 and June 2011. Participants completed a questionnaire measuring acculturation, and clinical and demographic variables were obtained from an institutional database. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine differences in surgical procedures received and adherence to long-term survivorship care by acculturation level. RESULTS: Bilingual (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85-4.02, P = .11) and English-dominant women (OR = 2.39; 95% CI = 1.02-5.61, P = .04) were more likely to receive breast-conserving surgery (versus mastectomy) than were Spanish-dominant women. Among all patients, adherence to surveillance mammography and clinic visits decreased over time; the decline in clinic visit adherence was statistically significant (P = .005). Although no statistically significant association was found between acculturation and adherence to long-term survivorship care, receipt of breast-conserving surgery (versus mastectomy) was significantly associated with higher adherence to surveillance mammograms. CONCLUSION: Acculturation may play a role in decision-making about surgical management of breast cancer, and further studies with larger samples are needed to explore its role in adherence to survivorship care recommendations. Findings from this study may help identify patients requiring additional support while making decisions pertaining to their cancer treatment and survivorship care.