Impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic on neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in patients diagnosed with epithelial type ovarian cancer.

Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed critical challenges in providing care to ovarian cancer (OC) patients, including delays in OC diagnosis and treatment initiation. To accommodate for delays in OC surgery, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recommended preferential use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy during the pandemic. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in patients diagnosed with OC. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with stage II-IV ovarian cancer of epithelial subtype between 01/01/2017-06/30/2021 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated healthcare system in the United States. Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed between 2017-2020 were identified from KPSC's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-affiliated cancer registry. Patients diagnosed in 2021 were identified from the electronic medical records (EMR) using ICD-10 diagnosis codes, followed by medical chart review to validate diagnosis and extract information on histology and stage at diagnosis. March 4, 2020 was used as the cut-off to define pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between OC diagnosis and treatment completion were excluded. Data on neoadjuvant chemotherapy use were extracted from the cancer registry and EMR, supplemented by chart review. Modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association of the pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use. Results: Of 566 OC patients, 160 (28.3%) were diagnosed in the pandemic period. Patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were slightly younger (mean age 62.7 vs 64.9 years, p=0.07) and had a higher burden of Charlson comorbidities (p=0.05) than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period. No differences in time to treatment initiation were observed by pandemic periods. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use was documented in 58.7% patients during the pandemic period compared to 47.3% in pre-pandemic period (p=0.01). After adjusting for covariates, patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were 29% more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period [RR(95%CI): 1.29(1.12-1.49)]. Discussions: Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed in the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed before the pandemic. Future research on patient outcomes and trends in the post-pandemic period are warranted.

DNA methylation markers for risk of metastasis in a cohort of men with localized prostate cancer.

Accurately identifying life-threatening prostate cancer (PCa) at time of diagnosis remains an unsolved problem. We evaluated whether DNA methylation status of selected candidate genes can predict the risk of metastasis beyond clinical risk factors in men with untreated PCa. A nested case-control study was conducted among men diagnosed with localized PCa at Kaiser Permanente California between 01/01/1997-12/31/2006 who did not receive curative treatments. Cases were those who developed metastasis within 10 years from diagnosis. Controls were selected using density sampling. Ninety-eight candidate genes were selected from functional categories of cell cycle control, metastasis/tumour suppressors, cell signalling, cell adhesion/motility/invasion, angiogenesis, and immune function, and 41 from pluripotency genes. Cancer DNA from diagnostic biopsy blocks were extracted and analysed. Associations of methylation status were assessed using CpG site level and principal components-based analysis in conditional logistic regressions. In 215 cases and 404 controls, 27 candidate genes were found to be statistically significant in at least one of the two analytical approaches. The agreement between the methods was 25.9% (7 candidate genes, including 2 pluripotency markers). The DNA methylation status of several candidate genes was significantly associated with risk of metastasis in untreated localized PCa patients. These findings may inform future risk prediction models for PCa metastasis beyond clinical characteristics.

Use of Cancer-Directed therapy at the end of life among adolescents and young adults.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) frequently receive chemotherapy near death. We know less about use of targeted agents and immunotherapy or trends over time. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,836 AYAs with cancer who died between 2009-2019 after receiving care at one of three sites (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, and Kaiser Permanente Southern California). We reviewed electronic health data and medical records to examine use of cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and investigational drugs. RESULTS: Over the study period, 35% of AYAs received chemotherapy in the last 90 days of life; 24% received targeted therapy, 7% immunotherapy, and 5% investigational drugs. Fifty-six percent received at least one form of systemic cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life. After adjustment for patient sex, race, ethnicity, age, site of care, diagnosis, and years from diagnosis to death, the proportion of AYAs receiving targeted therapy (odds ratio (OR) 1.05 per year of death, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.10, P = .006), immunotherapy (OR 1.27, 95%CI 1.18-1.38, P<.0001), and any cancer-directed therapy (OR1.04, 95%CI 1.01-1.08, P=.01) in the last 90 days of life increased over time. CONCLUSIONS: More than half of AYAs receive cancer therapy in the last 90 days of life, and use of novel agents such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy are increasing over time. While some AYAs may wish to continue cancer therapy while living with advanced disease, efforts are needed to ensure that use of cancer-directed therapy meets preferences of AYAs approaching death.

Caring for Children in Relation to Financial Hardship, Advance Care Planning, and Genetic Testing Among Adolescent and Young Adults with Cancer.

Purpose: When a cancer diagnosis coincides with caring for children, it may influence the financial impacts of cancer and decisions to pursue advance care planning (ACP) or genetic testing. We examined associations between caring for children and financial hardship, ACP, and genetic testing among female adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors in North Carolina and California. Methods: Participants were diagnosed at ages 15-39 years with breast, melanoma, gynecologic, lymphoma, or thyroid cancer during 2004-2016. We estimated adjusted prevalence differences (aPDs) and ratios (aPRs) for each outcome by child caring status using marginal structural binomial regression models. Results: Among 1595 women ages 19-54 years at survey (median = 7 years since diagnosis), 819 (51.3%) reported that they were caring for children at diagnosis. Women caring for children had a higher prevalence of material financial hardship (e.g., medical debt; 30% vs. 21.9%; aPD = 9%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3 to 14; aPR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.72) but similar levels of psychological financial hardship compared to noncaregivers. Women caring for children were more likely to complete ACPs (42.2% vs. 30.7%; aPD = 9%, 95% CI: 3 to 16; aPR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.57). Among the 723 survivors of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer, the prevalence of genetic testing was higher among women caring for children (89%) than noncaregivers (81%); this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Women caring for children at diagnosis may be at elevated risk for adverse financial outcomes and may benefit from additional financial navigation support. Childcare responsibilities may further complicate health decision-making for AYAs diagnosed with cancer.

Quality of End-of-Life Care Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer.

Adolescents, young adults with cancer receive limited psychosocial and spiritual support near death.

Risk of adverse birth outcomes after adolescent and young adult cancer.

BACKGROUND: Many women diagnosed with cancer as adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) want biological children after cancer but lack information on the potential impact of their cancer history on future reproductive outcomes. We investigated the risk of adverse birth outcomes among AYA cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified insured women diagnosed with AYA breast cancer, thyroid cancer, gynecologic cancers, lymphoma, or melanoma from 2003 to 2016 in the state of North Carolina or the Kaiser Permanente health care systems in northern and southern California. Post-diagnosis births to cancer survivors were each matched with up to 5 births to women without cancer. Risk ratios for preterm birth (<37 completed weeks), very preterm birth (<34 completed weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA, <10th percentile of weight for gestational age) were estimated using modified Poisson regression. RESULTS: Analyses included 1648 births to 1268 AYA cancer survivors and 7879 births to 6066 women without cancer. Overall, risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, and SGA did not significantly differ between births to women with and without cancer. However, births to women with gynecologic cancers had a significantly increased risk of low birth weight (risk ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 3.21) and suggested increased risk of preterm birth (risk ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.54). Chemotherapy exposure was not associated with increased risk of adverse birth outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Women with gynecologic cancers, but not other cancers, had an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes compared to women without cancer.

What Constitutes Quality of Life? Perspectives of Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with advanced cancer identify maintaining a good quality of life (QoL) as a central goal of end-of-life care. QoL is a dynamic and subjective overarching concept that refers to an individual's relative satisfaction with their own life. Despite its importance to AYAs with advanced cancer, a patient-centered definition of QoL is lacking in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This qualitative secondary analysis of semistructured interviews was conducted across 3 institutions and 1 online support community among AYA patients with advanced cancer, family caregivers, and health care providers who cared for living or recently deceased AYAs. Interviewees were asked about priorities in receipt of care. Interviews were transcribed using NVivo software for primary analysis, and previously coded excerpts were screened for references to QoL. Relevant excerpts were sorted into organizing domains. RESULTS: Participants included 23 AYA patients, 28 family caregivers, and 29 health care providers (including physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, social workers, and psychologists). Four domains of QoL were identified: psychosocial and physical well-being, dignity, normalcy, and personal and family relationships. Within each domain there was agreement across AYAs, caregivers, and health care providers, with nuanced perspectives provided by AYAs of different ages. Personal and family relationships was the most frequently referenced domain of QoL among all participants. A common feature of each domain was that adaptation to current circumstances impacted perspectives on QoL. Patients valued active participation in the development of a care plan that supported these domains. CONCLUSIONS: AYAs with advanced cancer, their caregivers, and health care providers agree on several broad domains of QoL in this population. To provide high-quality, patient-centered care, care plans should integrate these domains to enable AYAs to maximize their QoL throughout their advanced cancer care.

Screening Beyond the Evidence: Patterns of Age and Comorbidity for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Little evidence exists to guide continuation of screening beyond the recommended ages of national guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, although increasing age and comorbidity burden is likely to reduce the screening benefit of lower mortality. OBJECTIVE: Characterize screening after recommended stopping ages, by age and comorbidities in a large, diverse sample. DESIGN: Serial cross-sectional. PARTICIPANTS: All individuals in the PROSPR-I consortium cohorts from 75 to 89 years of age for breast cancer screening, 66-89 years of age for cervical cancer screening, and 76-89 years of age for colorectal cancer screening from 2011 to 2013. The lower age thresholds were based on the guidelines for each respective cancer type. MAIN MEASURES: Proportion of annual screening by cancer type in relation to age and Charlson comorbidity score and median years of screening past guideline age. We estimated the likelihood of screening past the guideline-based age as a function of age and comorbidity using logistic regression. KEY RESULTS: The study cohorts included individuals screening for breast (n = 33,475); cervical (n = 459,318); and colorectal (n = 556,356) cancers. In the year following aging out, approximately 30% of the population was screened for breast cancer, 2% of the population was screened for cervical, and almost 5% for colorectal cancer. The median number of years screened past the guideline-based recommendation was 5, 3, and 4 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. Of those screening > 10 years past the guideline-based age,15%, 46%, and 25% had ≥ 3 comorbidities respectively. Colorectal cancer screening had the smallest decline in the likelihood of screening beyond the age-based recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The odds of screening past guideline-based age decreased with comorbidity burden for breast and cervical cancer screening but not for colorectal. These findings suggest the need to evaluate shared decision tools to help patients understand whether screening is appropriate and to generate more evidence in older populations.

Genome-wide methylation profiling of diagnostic tumor specimens identified DNA methylation markers associated with metastasis among men with untreated localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: We used a genome-wide discovery approach to identify methylation markers associated with metastasis in men with localized prostate cancer (PCa), as better identification of those at high risk of metastasis can inform treatment decision-making. METHODS: We identified men with localized PCa at Kaiser Permanente California (January 1, 1997-December 31, 2006) who did not receive curative treatment and followed them for 10 years to determine metastasis status. Cases were chart review-confirmed metastasis, and controls were matched using density sampling. We extracted DNA from the cancerous areas in the archived diagnostic tissue blocks. We used Illumina's Infinium MethylationEPIC BeadChip for methylation interrogation. We used conditional logistic regression and Bonferroni's correction to identify methylation markers associated with metastasis. In a separate validation cohort (2007), we evaluated the added predictive utility of the methylation score beyond clinical risk score. RESULTS: Among 215 cases and 404 controls, 31 CpG sites were significantly associated with metastasis status. Adding the methylation score to the clinical risk score did not meaningfully improve the c-statistic (0.80-0.81) in the validation cohort, though the score itself was statistically significant (p < 0.01). In the validation cohort, both clinical risk score alone and methylation marker score alone are well calibrated for predicted 10-year metastasis risks. Adding the methylation score to the clinical risk score only marginally improved predictive risk calibration. CONCLUSION: Our findings do not support the use of these markers to improve clinical risk prediction. The methylation markers identified may inform novel hypothesis in the roles of these genetic regions in metastasis development.

Discussions About Goals of Care and Advance Care Planning Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer Approaching the End of Life.

PURPOSE: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer receive high rates of medically intensive measures at the end of life. This study aimed to characterize the prevalence and timing of conversations about goals of care and advance care planning among AYAs at the end of life as one potential influence on care received. METHODS: This was a review of electronic health data and medical records for 1,929 AYAs age 12-39 years who died after receiving care at one of three sites between 2003 and 2019, including documented conversations about goals of care and advance care planning, and care received. RESULTS: A majority of AYAs were female (54%) and White (61%); 12% were Asian, 8% Black, and 27% Hispanic. Most patients had documented discussions about prognosis (86%), goals of care (83%), palliative care (79%), hospice (79%), and preferred location of death (64%). When last documented goals of care were evaluated, 69% of patients wanted care focused on palliation; however, 29% of those with palliative goals spent time in the intensive care unit (ICU) in the last month of life, and 32% had multiple emergency room (ER) visits. When goals-of-care discussions happened earlier, >30 days before death, AYAs were less likely to receive chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life (P = .001), ICU care (P < .001), ER visits (P < .001), and hospitalizations in the last month (P < .001). CONCLUSION: High rates of medically intensive measures among AYAs near the end of life do not appear to be the result of a lack of discussions about goals of care and advance care planning. Although some interventions may be used to support palliative goals, earlier discussions have potential to reduce late-life intensive measures.

Patient, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspectives on Core Components of Therapeutic Alliance for Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Qualitative Study.

Importance: The patient-clinician therapeutic alliance is an important aspect of high-quality cancer care. However, components of the therapeutic alliance in adolescents and young adults (AYAs, aged 12-39 years) with cancer have not been defined. Objective: To identify components of and barriers to the therapeutic alliance between AYAs, caregivers, and clinicians from the perspective of all key stakeholders. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this qualitative study, semistructured in-depth interviews with patients, caregivers, and clinicians were conducted from 2018 to 2021 with no additional follow-up, with content analysis of resulting transcripts. Participants were recruited from Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, and an online cancer support community (Cactus Cancer Society). Eligible participants were English- or Spanish-speaking. Eligible patients were aged 12 to 39 years with stage IV or recurrent cancer. Eligible caregivers cared for an AYA living with advanced cancer or one who had died within 5 years. Eligible clinicians routinely provided care for AYAs with cancer. Main Outcomes and Measures: Perspectives on therapeutic alliance. Results: Interviews were conducted with 80 participants: 23 were patients (48% were female; 78% were White), 28 were caregivers (82% were female; 50% were White), and 29 were clinicians (69% were female; 45% were White). The mean (SD) age of patients was 29 (7.3) years. Interviews identified 6 components of therapeutic alliance: (1) compassion; (2) sense of connection; (3) clinician presence; (4) information sharing; (5) shared goals; and (6) individualization of care. While some domains were represented in prior models of therapeutic alliance, a unique domain was identified related to the need for individualization of the approach to care for AYA patients and their caregivers. Interviews also identified potential barriers to building the therapeutic alliance specific to the AYA population, including managing discordant needs between patients and caregivers and communication challenges at the end of life. Conclusions and Relevance: This study identified core components and barriers to building therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population from the perspective of all the key stakeholders in the relationship. A novel component highlighting the need for individualization was identified. This model enables a deeper understanding of how to build therapeutic alliance in the AYA advanced cancer population, which may guide clinician training and facilitate improved care for this vulnerable population.

Quality Indicators for Adolescents and Young Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Modified Delphi Process With Patients, Family Members, and Clinicians.

CONTEXT: Quality measures have been devised for end-of-life care of older adults with cancer, but are lacking for adolescents and young adults (AYAs). OBJECTIVE: We previously conducted interviews with AYAs, family caregivers, and clinicians to identify priority domains for high quality care of AYAs with advanced cancer. The goal of this study was to use a modified Delphi process to form consensus around the highest priority quality indicators. METHODS: A modified Delphi process was conducted with 10 AYAs with recurrent or metastatic cancer, 11 family caregivers, and 29 multidisciplinary clinicians, using small group web conferences. Participants were asked to rate the importance of each of 41 potential quality indicators, rank the 10 most important, and engage in discussion to reconcile differences. RESULTS: Of 41 initial indicators, 34 were rated as highly important (rating seven, eight, or nine on a nine-point scale) by >70% of participants. The panel was unable to reach consensus around the 10 most important indicators. Instead, participants recommended retaining a larger set of indicators to reflect potential for different priorities across the population, resulting in a final set of 32 indicators. Recommended indicators broadly encompassed attention to physical symptoms; quality of life; psychosocial, and spiritual care; communication and decision-making; relationships with clinicians; care and treatment; and independence. CONCLUSION: A patient- and family-centered process for quality indicator development led to strong endorsement of multiple potential indicators by Delphi participants. Further validation and refinement will be performed using a survey of bereaved family members.

Pregnancy attempts among adolescent and young adult cancer survivors.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether demographic and cancer-related characteristics and factors such as fertility discussion with a medical provider and fertility preservation use are associated with attempting pregnancy after adolescent and young adult cancer. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): Women with lymphoma, breast cancer, thyroid cancer, or gynecologic cancer diagnosed at 15-39 years from 2004 to 2016 were identified from the North Carolina Cancer Registry and the Kaiser Permanente Northern and Southern California health care systems and responded to an online survey addressing survivorship concerns, including fertility and reproductive outcomes. EXPOSURES: Demographic characteristics, cancer characteristics, fertility discussion with a medical provider or fertility specialist between cancer diagnosis and starting cancer treatment, use of fertility preservation strategies (freezing embryos or oocytes) after cancer diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Pregnancy attempt after cancer diagnosis, defined by either a pregnancy or 12 months of trying to become pregnant without pregnancy. RESULT(S): Among 801 participants who had not reached their desired family size at diagnosis, 77% had a fertility discussion with any medical provider between cancer diagnosis and treatment initiation, and 8% used fertility preservation after cancer diagnosis. At survey (median =7 years after diagnosis; interquartile range, 4-10), 32% had attempted pregnancy. Neither fertility discussion with any medical provider nor fertility counseling with a fertility specialist was significantly associated with pregnancy attempts. However, the use of fertility preservation was significantly associated with attempting pregnancy (prevalence ratios = 1.74; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.32). Other characteristics positively associated with pregnancy attempts included younger age at diagnosis, longer time since diagnosis, having a partner (at diagnosis or at survey), and having a history of infertility before cancer diagnosis. CONCLUSION(S): Use of fertility preservation strategies was uncommon in our cohort but was associated with attempting pregnancy after cancer. Ensuring access to fertility preservation methods may help adolescent and young adult cancer survivors to plan and initiate future fertility.

Exposure to statins post localized prostate cancer diagnosis and risk of metastasis among men who did not receive curative prostate cancer treatment.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the effect of statin exposure on metastasis risk among prostate cancer patients not receiving curative treatment. METHODS: We included men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer at an integrated health care system between 1997 and 2006 who did not receive curative treatment within 6 months of diagnosis. We followed these men until a metastatic event, disenrollment, death, or 12/31/2016. We collected all data from electronic health records supplemented by chart review. We used Cox regressions to examine the association between post-diagnostic statin exposure and metastasis, controlling for clinical characteristics and pre-diagnostic statin exposure. RESULTS: There were 4245 men included. Mean age of diagnosis was 68.02 years. 46.6% of men used statins after prostate cancer diagnosis. During follow-up, 192 men developed metastasis (cumulative incidence rate: 14.5%). In the adjusted Cox model, statin use post-prostate cancer diagnosis was not significantly associated with a metastatic event (HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.69, 1.36). Pre-diagnostic statin use was also not associated with development of metastasis (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.53, 1.10). We did not observe a dose-response for the proportion of person-time at-risk post-prostate cancer diagnosis on statins (HR = 0.98 per 10% increase in person-time exposed [95% CI = 0.93, 1.03]). CONCLUSIONS: We did not find an inverse association between post-diagnosis statin exposure and metastasis development in localized prostate cancer patients who did not receive active treatment. Our results did not offer support to the chemopreventive potential of post-diagnostic statin use among men on active surveillance.

"The simple life experiences that every other human gets": Desire for normalcy among adolescents and young adults with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with advanced cancer identify normalcy as an important component of quality end-of-life care. We sought to define domains of normalcy and identify ways in which clinicians facilitate or hinder normalcy during advanced cancer care. PROCEDURE: This was a secondary analysis of a qualitative study that aimed to identify priority domains for end-of-life care. Content analysis of semi-structured interviews among AYAs aged 12-39 years with advanced cancer, caregivers, and clinicians was used to evaluate transcripts. Coded excerpts were reviewed to identify themes related to normalcy. RESULTS: Participants included 23 AYAs with advanced cancer, 28 caregivers, and 29 clinicians. Participants identified five domains of normalcy including relationships, activities, career/school, milestones, and appearance. AYAs and caregivers identified that clinicians facilitate normalcy through exploration of these domains with AYAs, allowing flexibility in care plans, identification of short-term and long-term goals across normalcy domains, and recognizing losses of normalcy that occur during cancer care. CONCLUSIONS: AYAs with cancer experience multiple threats to normalcy during advanced cancer care. Clinicians can attend to normalcy and improve AYA quality of life by acknowledging these losses through ongoing discussions on how best to support domains of normalcy and by reinforcing AYA identities beyond a cancer diagnosis.

Identifying monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance from electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) precedes multiple myeloma (MM). Use of electronic health records may facilitate large-scale epidemiologic research to elucidate risk factors for the progression of MGUS to MM or other lymphoid malignancies. AIMS: We evaluated the accuracy of an electronic health records-based approach for identifying clinically diagnosed MGUS cases for inclusion in studies of patient outcomes/ progression risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were retrieved from Kaiser Permanente Southern California's comprehensive electronic health records, which contain documentation of all outpatient and inpatient visits, laboratory tests, diagnosis codes and a cancer registry. We ascertained potential MGUS cases diagnosed between 2008 and 2014 using the presence of an MGUS ICD-9 diagnosis code (273.1). We initially excluded those diagnosed with MM within 6 months after MGUS diagnosis, then subsequently those with any lymphoid malignancy diagnosis from 2007 to 2014. We reviewed medical charts for 100 randomly selected potential cases for evidence of a physician diagnosis of MGUS, which served as our gold standard for case confirmation. To assess sensitivity, we also investigated the presence of the ICD-9 code in the records of 40 randomly selected and chart review-confirmed MGUS cases among patients with a laboratory report of elevated circulating monoclonal (M-) protein (a key test for MGUS diagnosis) and no subsequent lymphoid malignancy (as described above). The positive predictive value (PPV) for the ICD-9 code was 98%. All MGUS cases confirmed by chart review also had confirmatory laboratory test results. Of the confirmed cases first identified via M-protein test results, 88% also had the ICD-9 diagnosis code. CONCLUSION: The diagnosis code-based approach has excellent PPV and likely high sensitivity for detecting clinically diagnosed MGUS. The generalizability of this approach outside an integrated healthcare system warrants further evaluation.

A study protocol for a cluster randomized pragmatic trial for comparing strategies for implementing primary HPV testing for routine cervical cancer screening in a large health care system.

BACKGROUND: Limited guidance exists regarding implementation strategies that best facilitate cancer screening practice substitution and achieve optimal stakeholder-centered outcomes. Here we describe the protocol for a randomized pragmatic trial comparing two implementation strategies to facilitate substitution of primary HPV screening for Pap and HPV co-testing to perform routine cervical cancer screening of women aged 30-65 years at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). METHODS: Twelve service areas within KPSC will be randomized to a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation + local-tailored implementation" strategy or a "centrally-administered system-wide implementation only" strategy. The centrally-administered strategy comprises clinician and staff educational activities. Sites in the local-tailored arm will then conduct a structured local needs assessment followed by site-specific selection and deployment of implementation interventions. Surveys and interviews will be conducted among women and providers from the primary care and ob/gyn departments prior to the system-wide transition, shortly after the transition, and after the completion of local-tailored interventions. A stakeholder advisory committee will assist with study design, defining stakeholder-centered outcomes, and developing data collection tools. RESULTS: The primary outcome of interest is uptake of primary HPV screening. Secondary provider-centered outcomes include provider knowledge, delivery of patient education, satisfaction with the practice substitution process, and resistance to primary HPV screening. Secondary patient-centered outcomes include patient knowledge, stigma, and satisfaction with the screening process. Intervention fidelity will also be measured via surveys. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study will help inform future use of a local-tailored implementation strategy for adopting primary HPV screening at large health care systems. Findings may also be applicable to other types of practice substitution.

Gaps in the screening process for women diagnosed with cervical cancer in four diverse US health care settings.

BACKGROUND: Potential care gaps in the cervical cancer screening process among women diagnosed with cervical cancer in an era with increased human papillomavirus (HPV) testing have not been extensively evaluated. METHODS: Women diagnosed with cervical cancer between ages 21 and 65 at four study sites between 2010 and 2014 were included. Screening histories were ascertained from 0.5 to 4 years prior to cervical cancer diagnosis. We identified potential care gaps in the screening history for each woman and classified them into one of three mutually exclusive types: lack of a screening test, screening test failure, and diagnostic/treatment care gap. Distributions of care gaps were tabulated by stage, histology, and study site. Multivariable nominal logistic regression was used to examine the associations between demographic and cancer characteristics and type of care gap. RESULTS: Of 499 women evaluated, 46% lacked a screening test in the time window examined, 31% experienced a screening test failure, and 22% experienced a diagnostic/treatment care gap. More than half of the women with advanced cancer and squamous cell carcinoma lacked a screening test compared to 31% and 24% of women with localized cancer and adenocarcinoma, respectively. Women aged 21-29 at diagnosis were more likely to experience screening test failure and diagnostic/treatment care gap, while those aged 50-65 were more likely to lack a screening test, compared to women aged 30-39. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate a continuing need to develop interventions targeting unscreened and under-screened women and improve detection and diagnosis of adenocarcinoma in women undergoing cervical cancer screening and diagnostic follow-up.

Trends in HPV vaccine administration and HPV vaccine coverage in children by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status during the COVID-19 pandemic in an integrated health care system in California.

BACKGROUND: We sought to evaluate the trends of HPV vaccination between 03/2019-09/2021 and whether the impact of the COVID pandemic on HPV vaccination varied by race/ethnicity and neighborhood deprivation index (NDI). METHODS: Electronic medical records at Kaiser Permanente Southern California were used to assess monthly volume of HPV vaccine doses administered among children aged 9-12.9yrs, and up-to-date coverage (% vaccinated) by age 13 between 03/2019-09/2021. Modified Poisson models were used to evaluate the interactions between race/ethnicity, NDI and the pandemic periods on HPV vaccine coverage. RESULTS: HPV vaccine doses administered in 2020/2021 have returned to the 2019 level after the initial drop. The average up-to-date coverage in 05/2021-09/2021 (54.8%) remained lower than the pre-pandemic level (58.5%). The associations between race/ethnicity, NDI and HPV vaccine coverage did not vary due to the pandemic. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccine promotion efforts are needed to address COVID-19 pandemic's lasting impact on HPV vaccination coverage.

Patient, Family, and Clinician Perspectives on Location of Death for Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer.

PURPOSE: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer have high rates of hospital deaths. It is not clear if this reflects their preferences or barriers to dying at home. METHODS: Between December 2018 and January 2021, we conducted in-depth interviews with AYAs (age 12-39 years) with stage IV or recurrent cancer, family caregivers including bereaved caregivers, and clinicians of AYAs with cancer. Patients were asked about their priorities for care including location of death, caregivers were asked what was most important in the care of their AYA family member, and clinicians were asked to reflect on priorities identified through caring for AYAs. Directed content analysis was applied to interview data, and themes regarding location of death were developed. RESULTS: Eighty individuals (23 AYAs, 28 caregivers, and 29 clinicians) participated in interviews. Most AYAs and caregivers preferred a home death. However, some AYAs and caregivers opted for a hospital death to alleviate caregiver burden or protect siblings from the perceived trauma of witnessing a home death. Lack of adequate services to manage intractable symptoms at home and insufficient caregiver support led some AYAs/caregivers to opt for hospital death despite a preference for home death. Participants acknowledged the value of hospice while also pointing out its limitations in attaining a home death. CONCLUSION: Although most AYAs prefer to die at home, this preference is not always achieved. Robust home-based services for effective symptom management and caregiver support are needed to close the gap between preferred and actual location of death for AYAs.