Disparities in parental distress in a multicenter clinical trial for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Parent psychological distress during childhood cancer treatment has short- and long-term implications for parent, child, and family well-being. Identifying targetable predictors of parental distress is essential to inform interventions. We investigated the association between household material hardship (HMH), a modifiable poverty-exposure defined as housing, food, or utility insecurity, and severe psychological distress among parents of children aged 1-17 years with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) enrolled on the multicenter Dana-Farber ALL Consortium Trial 16-001. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of parent-reported data. Parents completed an HMH survey within 32 days of clinical trial enrollment (T0) and again at 6 months into therapy (T1). The primary exposure was HMH at T0 and primary outcome was severe parental distress at T0 and T1, defined as a score greater than or equal to 13 on the Kessler-6 Psychological Distress Scale. Multivariable models were adjusted for ALL risk group and single parent status. RESULTS: Among 375 evaluable parents, one-third (32%; n = 120/375) reported HMH at T0. In multivariable analyses, T0 HMH was associated with over twice the odds of severe psychological distress at T0 and T1 HMH was associated with over 5 times the odds of severe distress at T1. CONCLUSIONS: Despite uniform clinical trial treatment of their children at well-resourced pediatric centers, HMH-exposed parents-compared with unexposed parents-experienced statistically significantly increased odds of severe psychological distress at the time of their child's leukemia diagnosis, which worsened 6 months into therapy. These data identify a high-risk parental population who may benefit from early psychosocial and HMH-targeted interventions to mitigate disparities in well-being.

Delphi Panel Consensus Recommendations for Screening and Managing Childhood Cancer Survivors at Risk for Cardiomyopathy.

Background: Cardiomyopathy is a leading cause of late morbidity and mortality in childhood cancer survivors (CCS). Evidence-based guidelines recommend risk-stratified screening for cardiomyopathy, but the management approach for abnormalities detected when screening asymptomatic young adult CCS is poorly defined. Objectives: The aims of this study were to build upon existing guidelines by describing the expert consensus-based cardiomyopathy screening practices, management approach, and clinical rationale for the management of young adult CCS with screening-detected abnormalities and to identify areas of controversy in practice. Methods: A multispecialty Delphi panel of 40 physicians with expertise in cancer survivorship completed 3 iterative rounds of semi-open-ended questionnaires regarding their approaches to the management of asymptomatic young adult CCS at risk for cardiomyopathy (screening practices, referrals, cardiac testing, laboratory studies, medications). Consensus was defined as ≥90% panelist agreement with recommendation. Results: The response rate was 100% for all 3 rounds. Panelists reached consensus on the timing and frequency of echocardiographic screening for anthracycline-associated cardiomyopathy, monitoring during pregnancy, laboratory testing for modifiable cardiac risk factors, and referral to cardiology for ejection fraction ≤50% or preserved ejection fraction with diastolic dysfunction. Controversial areas (<75% agreement) included chest radiation dose threshold to merit screening, indications for advanced cardiac imaging and cardiac serum biomarkers for follow-up of abnormal echocardiographic findings, and medical management of asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Conclusions: Expert practice is largely consistent with existing risk-based screening guidelines. Some recommendations for managing abnormalities detected on screening echocardiography remain controversial. The rationale offered by experts for divergent approaches may help guide clinical decisions in the absence of guidelines specific to young adult CCS.

Feasibility of oncology clinical trial-embedded evaluation of social determinants of health.

Social determinants of health (SDoH) are associated with stark disparities in cancer outcomes, but systematic SDoH data collection is virtually absent from oncology clinical trials. Trial-based SDoH data are essential to ensure representation of marginalized populations, contextualize outcome disparities, and identify health-equity intervention opportunities. We report the feasibility of a pediatric oncology multicenter therapeutic trial-embedded SDoH investigation. Among 448 trial participants, 392 (87.5%) opted-in to the embedded SDoH study; 375 (95.7%) completed baseline surveys, with high longitudinal response rates (88.9-93.1%) over 24 months. Trial-embedded SDoH data collection is feasible and acceptable and must be consistently included within future oncology trials.

Active learning for fellows: The hematopathology "unknown case".

The pediatric hematology/oncology fellowship program at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia set out to create a case-based learning curriculum for common hematologic malignancies that would apply principles of adult learning theory and improve fellows' retention of information in a supportive, goal-oriented learning environment. A framework we employed in developing this curriculum is that of "flow theory," which parallels many of the tenets of adult learning theory. After implementing this curriculum, which we call "the unknown case," the percentage of fellows correctly identifying a common hematopathologic diagnosis improved from 50% to 85%.

Faculty development in medical education research.

This 2012 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference breakout session was devoted to the task of identifying the history and current state of faculty development in education research in emergency medicine (EM). The participants set a future agenda for successful faculty development in education research. A number of education research and content experts collaborated during the session. This article summarizes existing academic and medical literature, expert opinions, and audience consensus to report our agreement and findings related to the promotion of faculty development.