Identifying predictors of COVID-related delays in cancer-specific medical care.

PURPOSE: Evidence of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer prevention and control is growing, but little is known about patient-level factors associated with delayed care. We analyzed data from a survey focused on Iowan cancer patients' COVID-19 experiences in the early part of the pandemic. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden (PERCH) program. We surveyed respondents on demographic characteristics, COVID-19 experiences and reactions, and delays in any cancer-related health care appointment, or cancer-related treatment appointments. Two-sided significance tests assessed differences in COVID-19 experiences and reactions between those who experienced delays and those who did not. RESULTS: There were 780 respondents (26% response), with breast, prostate, kidney, skin, and colorectal cancers representing the majority of respondents. Delays in cancer care were reported by 29% of respondents. In multivariable-adjusted models, rural residents (OR 1.47; 95% CI 1.03, 2.11) and those experiencing feelings of isolation (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.37, 3.47) were more likely to report any delay, where experiencing financial difficulties predicted delays in treatment appointments (OR 5.72; 95% CI 1.96, 16.67). Health insurance coverage and concern about the pandemic were not statistically significantly associated with delays. CONCLUSION: These findings may inform cancer care delivery during periods of instability when treatment may be disrupted by informing clinicians about concerns that patients have during the treatment process. Future research should assess whether delays in cancer care impact long-term cancer outcomes and whether delays exacerbate existing disparities in cancer outcomes.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against Long COVID in Children.

OBJECTIVES: Vaccination reduces the risk of acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in children, but it is less clear whether it protects against long COVID. We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against long COVID in children aged 5 to 17 years. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from 17 health systems in the RECOVER PCORnet electronic health record program for visits after vaccine availability. We examined both probable (symptom-based) and diagnosed long COVID after vaccination. RESULTS: The vaccination rate was 67% in the cohort of 1 037 936 children. The incidence of probable long COVID was 4.5% among patients with COVID-19, whereas diagnosed long COVID was 0.8%. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness within 12 months was 35.4% (95 CI 24.5-44.7) against probable long COVID and 41.7% (15.0-60.0) against diagnosed long COVID. VE was higher for adolescents (50.3% [36.6-61.0]) than children aged 5 to 11 (23.8% [4.9-39.0]). VE was higher at 6 months (61.4% [51.0-69.6]) but decreased to 10.6% (-26.8% to 37.0%) at 18-months. CONCLUSIONS: This large retrospective study shows moderate protective effect of severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 vaccination against long COVID. The effect is stronger in adolescents, who have higher risk of long COVID, and wanes over time. Understanding VE mechanism against long COVID requires more study, including electronic health record sources and prospective data.

Making progress against rare cancers: A case study on neuroendocrine tumors.

In April 2023, the National Cancer Institute offered a roadmap for cancer research to achieve Cancer Moonshot goals. To reach these goals requires making progress for all cancers, not just those that are most common. Achieving progress against rare cancers, as well as common cancers, requires involvement of large clinical research networks. In 2020, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) launched an initiative on Conducting Rare Disease Research using PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. The purpose of this commentary is to introduce the broader community of cancer researchers to the PCORnet NET-PRO study (comparing the effects of different treatment approaches for neuroendocrine tumors on patient-reported outcomes) thereby demonstrating how researchers can use the PCORnet infrastructure to conduct large-scale patient-centered studies of rare cancers.

COVID-19 outcomes in persons with hemophilia: results from a US-based national COVID-19 surveillance registry.

BACKGROUND: Hypercoagulable state contributing to thrombotic complications worsens COVID-19 severity and outcomes, whereas anticoagulation improves outcomes by alleviating hypercoagulability. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether hemophilia, an inherent hypocoagulable condition, offers protection against COVID-19 severity and reduces venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk in persons with hemophilia (PwH). METHODS: A 1:3 propensity score-matched retrospective cohort study used national COVID-19 registry data (January 2020 through January 2022) to compare outcomes between 300 male PwH and 900 matched controls without hemophilia. RESULTS: Analyses of PwH demonstrated that known risk factors (older age, heart failure, hypertension, cancer/malignancy, dementia, and renal and liver disease) contributed to severe COVID-19 and/or 30-day all-cause mortality. Non-central nervous system bleeding was an additional risk factor for poor outcomes in PwH. Odds of developing VTE with COVID-19 in PwH were associated with pre-COVID VTE diagnosis (odds ratio [OR], 51.9; 95% CI, 12.8-266; p < .001), anticoagulation therapy (OR, 12.7; 95% CI, 3.01-48.6; p < .001), and pulmonary disease (OR, 16.1; 95% CI, 10.4-25.4; p < .001). Thirty-day all-cause mortality (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.75-2.11; p = .3) and VTE events (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.64-2.73; p = .4) were not significantly different between the matched cohorts; however, hospitalizations (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.20-2.10; p = .001) and non-central nervous system bleeding events (OR, 4.78; 95% CI, 2.98-7.48; p < .001) were increased in PwH. In multivariate analyses, hemophilia did not reduce adverse outcomes (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.74-2.31; p = .2) or VTE (OR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.44-2.67; p = .8) but increased bleeding risk (OR, 4.70; 95% CI, 2.98-7.48; p < .001). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for patient characteristics/comorbidities, hemophilia increased bleeding risk with COVID-19 but did not protect against severe disease and VTE.

Vaccine Effectiveness Against Long COVID in Children: A Report from the RECOVER EHR Cohort.

Objective: Vaccination reduces the risk of acute COVID-19 in children, but it is less clear whether it protects against long COVID. We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against long COVID in children aged 5-17 years. Methods: This retrospective cohort study used data from 17 health systems in the RECOVER PCORnet electronic health record (EHR) Program for visits between vaccine availability, and October 29, 2022. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate VE against long COVID with matching on age group (5-11, 12-17) and time period and adjustment for sex, ethnicity, health system, comorbidity burden, and pre-exposure health care utilization. We examined both probable (symptom-based) and diagnosed long COVID in the year following vaccination. Results: The vaccination rate was 56% in the cohort of 1,037,936 children. The incidence of probable long COVID was 4.5% among patients with COVID-19, while diagnosed long COVID was 0.7%. Adjusted vaccine effectiveness within 12 months was 35.4% (95 CI 24.5 - 44.5) against probable long COVID and 41.7% (15.0 - 60.0) against diagnosed long COVID. VE was higher for adolescents 50.3% [36.3 - 61.0]) than children aged 5-11 (23.8% [4.9 - 39.0]). VE was higher at 6 months (61.4% [51.0 - 69.6]) but decreased to 10.6% (-26.8 - 37.0%) at 18-months. Discussion: This large retrospective study shows a moderate protective effect of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination against long COVID. The effect is stronger in adolescents, who have higher risk of long COVID, and wanes over time. Understanding VE mechanism against long COVID requires more study, including EHR sources and prospective data. Article Summary: Vaccination against COVID-19 has a protective effect against long COVID in children and adolescents. The effect wanes over time but remains significant at 12 months. What's Known on This Subject: Vaccines reduce the risk and severity of COVID-19 in children. There is evidence for reduced long COVID risk in adults who are vaccinated, but little information about similar effects for children and adolescents, who have distinct forms of long COVID. What This Study Adds: Using electronic health records from US health systems, we examined large cohorts of vaccinated and unvaccinated patients <18 years old and show that vaccination against COVID-19 is associated with reduced risk of long COVID for at least 12 months. Contributors' Statement: Drs. Hanieh Razzaghi and Charles Bailey conceptualized and designed the study, supervised analyses, drafted the initial manuscript, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript.Drs. Christopher Forrest and Yong Chen designed the study and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript.Ms. Kathryn Hirabayashi, Ms. Andrea Allen, and Dr. Qiong Wu conducted analyses, and critically reviewed and revised the manuscript.Drs. Suchitra Rao, H Timothy Bunnell, Elizabeth A. Chrischilles, Lindsay G. Cowell, Mollie R. Cummins, David A. Hanauer, Benjamin D. Horne, Carol R. Horowitz, Ravi Jhaveri, Susan Kim, Aaron Mishkin, Jennifer A. Muszynski, Susanna Nagie, Nathan M. Pajor, Anuradha Paranjape, Hayden T. Schwenk, Marion R. Sills, Yacob G. Tedla, David A. Williams, and Ms. Miranda Higginbotham critically reviewed and revised the manuscript.All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Authorship statement: Authorship has been determined according to ICMJE recommendations.

Comparing COVID-19 Response Behaviors between a Cancer Patient Sample and a Population-Based Cancer-Free Sample in a Rural Midwestern State.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused an increase in fear, anxiety, and depressive symptoms globally. For populations at increased risk for adverse outcomes due to illness, such as cancer patients, these worries may have been exacerbated. Understanding how the pandemic impacted cancer patients will inform better preparation for future events that cause disturbances to cancer care delivery. METHODS: This study analyzed data from two surveys to determine whether cancer patients' responses differed from a cancer-free population-based sample in terms of concerns, preventive behaviors, and thoughts on their healthcare provider's communication regarding COVID-19 in a US Midwestern state. In August 2020, a survey was sent to 10,009 Iowans aged 18 and older, randomly selected from the 2018 Iowa voter registration file. In September 2020, a survey was emailed to 2,954 cancer patients aged 18 and older who opted into the University of Iowa Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center's Patients Enhancing Research Collaborations at Holden program. Previously validated and pretested Likert-type and multiple-choice items assessed concern regarding COVID-19, social distancing perception and behaviors, and demographic characteristics of respondents. We used χ2 tests and logistic regression to examine differences between the cancer patient and general population survey responses. RESULTS: We included 3,622 responses from the general population survey and 780 responses from the cancer patient survey in this analysis. Cancer patient survey respondents were more frequently older, lived in urban areas, had Medicare insurance coverage, had a college degree or higher, and were married. Cancer patients were more likely to report engaging in social distancing behaviors and greater concern regarding the pandemic. CONCLUSION: This study suggests differences in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer patients compared to cancer-free members of the general population. These results indicate the need for consideration of cancer patients' physical and mental health during large-scale disruptions to cancer care.

Disruption in Blood Pressure Control With the COVID-19 Pandemic: The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory.

OBJECTIVE: To explore trends in blood pressure (BP) control before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Health systems participating in the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) Blood Pressure Control Laboratory Surveillance System responded to data queries, producing 9 BP control metrics. Averages of the BP control metrics (weighted by numbers of observations in each health system) were calculated and compared between two 1-year measurement periods (January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2019, and January 1, 2020, through December 31, 2020). RESULTS: Among 1,770,547 hypertensive persons in 2019, BP control to <140/<90 mm Hg varied across 24 health systems (range, 46%-74%). Reduced BP control occurred in most health systems with onset of the COVID-19 pandemic; the weighted average BP control was 60.5% in 2019 and 53.3% in 2020. Reductions were also evident for BP control to <130/<80 mm Hg (29.9% in 2019 and 25.4% in 2020) and improvement in BP (reduction of 10 mm Hg in systolic BP or achievement of systolic BP <140 mm Hg; 29.7% in 2019 and 23.8% in 2020). Two BP control process metrics exhibited pandemic-associated disruption: repeat visit in 4 weeks after a visit with uncontrolled hypertension (36.7% in 2019 and 31.7% in 2020) and prescription of fixed-dose combination medications among those with 2 or more drug classes (24.6% in 2019 and 21.5% in 2020). CONCLUSION: BP control decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a corresponding reduction in follow-up health care visits among persons with uncontrolled hypertension. It is unclear whether the observed decline in BP control during the pandemic will contribute to future cardiovascular events.

Sociodemographic and Clinical Factors Associated with Nonattendance at the Hepatology Clinic.

BACKGROUND: Absenteeism from clinic appointments reduces efficiency, wastes resources, and contributes to longer wait times. There are limited data regarding factors associated with nonattendance in hepatology clinics. Identifying factors related to appointment nonattendance may help in the design of interventions for reducing absenteeism. METHODS: We aim to identify sociodemographic, clinical, and appointment-related factors associated with absenteeism following referral to a liver clinic in a tertiary academic center located in the US Midwest. We designed a case-control study using data from electronic medical records of patients scheduled for appointments between January 2016 and December 2021. Cases were defined as patients who canceled appointments on the same day or resulting in no-shows, and controls were those who completed the referral visit. Information about patients' sociodemographic characteristics, appointment details, and etiology of liver disease were recorded. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to analyze factors related to nonattendance. RESULTS: Of 3404 scheduled appointments, 460 (13.5%) missed visits were recorded. In the multivariable logistic regression models, hepatitis C and alcohol-associated liver disease were associated with greater odds of nonattendance [odds ratio (OR) 4.0 (95% CI 3.2-4.9), OR 2.7 (1.7-4.2), respectively] compared to those with other liver disease. Sociodemographic characteristics associated with risk of nonattendance included being Black [OR 2.6, (1.8-3.7)], Medicaid insurance or no insurance [OR 2.3 (1.7-2.9), OR 2.5 (1.6-3.7), respectively], non-English speaking [OR 1.8 (1.1-3.1)], being unmarried [OR 1.8 (1.4-2.2)], and longer wait time (> 30 days) until appointments [OR 1.8 (1.5-2.2)]. CONCLUSION: Several sociodemographic and administrative characteristics, as well as hepatitis C and alcohol-associated liver disease were associated with appointment nonattendance. Targeted future interventions may help to decrease nonattendance.

Factors Associated With Receipt of Molecular Testing and its Impact on Time to Initial Systemic Therapy in Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations for molecular testing irrespective of patient characteristics, differences exist in receipt of molecular testing for oncogenic drivers amongst metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) patients. Exploration into these differences and their effects on treatment is needed to identify opportunities for improvement. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients diagnosed with mNSCLC between 2011 and 2018 using PCORnet's Rapid Cycle Research Project dataset (n = 3600). Log-binomial, Cox proportional hazards (PH), and time-varying Cox regression models were used to ascertain whether molecular testing was received, and time from diagnosis to molecular testing and/or initial systemic treatment in the context of patient age, sex, race/ethnicity, and multiple comorbidities status. RESULTS: The majority of patients in this cohort were ≤ 65 years of age (median [25th, 75th]: 64 [57, 71]), male (54.3%), non-Hispanic white individuals (81.6%), with > 2 comorbidities in addition to mNSCLC (54.1%). About half the cohort received molecular testing (49.9%). Patients who received molecular testing had a 59% higher probability of initial systemic treatment than patients who were yet to receive testing. Multiple comorbidity status was positively associated with receipt of molecular testing (RR, 1.27; 95% CI 1.08, 1.49). CONCLUSION: Receipt of molecular testing in academic centers was associated with earlier initiation of systemic treatment. This finding underscores the need to increase molecular testing rates amongst mNSCLC patients during a clinically relevant period. Further studies to validate these findings in community centers are warranted.

Current Approaches to Serving Catchment Areas in Cancer Centers: Insights from the Big Ten Cancer Research Consortium Population Science Working Group.

In 2021, the NCI issued updated guidance clarifying the mission and organizational structure for Community Outreach and Engagement (COE) for Cancer Center Support Grants. These guidelines outlined how cancer centers should address the cancer burden of the catchment area (CA) and define how COE would partner with the community to inform cancer research and implement programs to reduce the cancer burden. In this paper, the Common Elements Committee of the Population Science Working Group in the Big Ten Cancer Research Consortium describes their respective approaches to implementing these guidelines. We discuss our definitions and rationales for each CA, data sources used, and our approach to assessing the impact of COE efforts on the burden of cancer in our respective CA. Importantly, we describe methods of translating unmet CA needs into our cancer-relevant outreach activities, and cancer research addressing the needs of respective CAs. Implementing these new guidelines is a challenge, and we hope that sharing approaches and experiences will foster cross-center collaborations that may more effectively reduce the burden of cancer in the US and meet the mission of the NCI's Cancer Center Program.

Outcomes Associated With Rural Emergency Department Provider-to-Provider Telehealth for Sepsis Care: A Multicenter Cohort Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that provider-to-provider tele-emergency department care is associated with more 28-day hospital-free days and improved Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guideline adherence in rural emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: Multicenter (n=23), propensity-matched, cohort study using medical records of patients with sepsis from rural hospitals in an established, on-demand, rural video tele-ED network in the upper Midwest between August 2016 and June 2019. The primary outcome was 28-day hospital-free days, with secondary outcomes of 28-day inhospital mortality and SSC guideline adherence. RESULTS: A total of 1,191 patients were included in the analysis, with tele-ED used for 326 (27%). Tele-ED cases were more likely to be transferred to another hospital (88% versus 8%, difference 79%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 75% to 83%). After matching and regression adjustment, tele-ED cases did not have more 28-day hospital-free days (difference 0.07 days more for tele-ED, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.17) or 28-day inhospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.51, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.60). Adherence with both the SSC 3-hour bundle (aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.22) and complete bundle (aOR 0.45, 95% CI 0.02 to 11.60) were similar. An a priori-defined subgroup of patients treated by advanced practice providers suggested that the mortality was lower in the cohort with tele-ED use (aOR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.73) despite no significant difference in complete SSC bundle adherence (aOR 2.88, 95% CI 0.52 to 15.86). CONCLUSION: Rural emergency department patients treated with provider-to-provider tele-ED care in a mature network appear to have similar clinical outcomes to those treated without.

Cardiac Adverse Events Associated With Chemo-Radiation Versus Chemotherapy for Resectable Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare Study.

Background We compared cardiac outcomes for surgery-eligible patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer treated adjuvantly or neoadjuvantly with chemotherapy versus chemo-radiation therapy in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. Methods and Results Patients were age 66+, had stage IIIA/B resectable non-small-cell lung cancer diagnosed between 2007 and 2015, and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemo-radiation within 121 days of diagnosis. Patients having chemo-radiation and chemotherapy only were propensity-score matched and followed from day 121 to first cardiac outcome, noncardiac death, radiation initiation by patients who received chemotherapy only, fee-for-service enrollment interruption, or December 31, 2016. Cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and competing risks subdistribution HRs were estimated. The primary outcome was the first of these severe cardiac events: acute myocardial infarction, other hospitalized ischemic heart disease, hospitalized heart failure, percutaneous coronary intervention/coronary artery bypass graft, cardiac death, or urgent/inpatient care for pericardial disease, conduction abnormality, valve disorder, or ischemic heart disease. With median follow-up of 13 months, 70 of 682 patients who received chemo-radiation (10.26%) and 43 of 682 matched patients who received chemotherapy only (6.30%) developed a severe cardiac event (P=0.008) with median time to first event 5.45 months. Chemo-radiation increased the rate of severe cardiac events (cause-specific HR: 1.62 [95% CI, 1.11-2.37] and subdistribution HR: 1.41 [95% CI, 0.97-2.04]). Cancer severity appeared greater among patients who received chemo-radiation (noncardiac death cause-specific HR, 2.53 [95% CI, 1.93-3.33] and subdistribution HR, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.90-3.33]). Conclusions Adding radiation therapy to chemotherapy is associated with an increased risk of severe cardiac events among patients with resectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer for whom survival benefit of radiation therapy is unclear.

Generating Practice-Based Evidence in the Use of Guideline-Recommended Combination Therapy for Secondary Prevention of Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Background: Clinical guidelines recommend beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers, and statins for the secondary prevention of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). It is not clear whether variation in real-world practice reflects poor quality-of-care or a balance of outcome tradeoffs across patients. Methods: The study cohort included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries hospitalized 2007-2008 for AMI. Treatment within 30-days post-discharge was grouped into one of eight possible combinations for the three drug classes. Outcomes included one-year overall survival, one-year cardiovascular-event-free survival, and 90-day adverse events. Treatment effects were estimated using an Instrumental Variables (IV) approach with instruments based on measures of local-area practice style. Pre-specified data elements were abstracted from hospital medical records for a stratified, random sample to create "unmeasured confounders" (per claims data) and assess model assumptions. Results: Each drug combination was observed in the final sample (N = 124,695), with 35.7% having all three, and 13.5% having none. Higher rates of guideline-recommended treatment were associated with both better survival and more adverse events. Unmeasured confounders were not associated with instrumental variable values. Conclusions: The results from this study suggest that providers consider both treatment benefits and harms in patients with AMIs. The investigation of estimator assumptions support the validity of the estimates.

The effects of antidepressants on depressive symptoms in manifest Huntington's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Currently there is little evidence to guide the treatment of depression in Huntington's disease (HD). The primary objective was to determine the effectiveness of antidepressant medications on lowering depressive symptom scores in patients with manifest HD. The secondary objective was to determine the effect of antidepressant use on measures of disease progression. METHODS: After retrospectively identifying motor-manifest HD participants with at least borderline depressive symptoms from the Enroll-HD database, 86 new users of antidepressant medication were exact matched with non-users on depression score, and matched on propensity scores developed using age, sex, CAG repeat length, anxiety scores, and disease progression measures. Linear mixed effect models were used to assess the change in depression scores, anxiety scores, and disease progression measures based on antidepressant use between two visits approximately one-year apart. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the change in depression score between antidepressant users and non-users (p = 0.46). There were also no significant differences in the change in total motor score (p = 0.88), total functional capacity score (p = 0.16), number correct on the symbol digit modality test (p = 0.49), or anxiety score (p = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Initiation of antidepressant medication was not associated with a greater reduction in depressive symptoms or changes in other symptoms when compared to non-use. The findings of this study support further research on the effectiveness of antidepressants in Huntington's disease patients. Clinical trials or studies with a larger sample of new antidepressant users should be used to assess the causal effects of antidepressant medications on depressive symptoms.

Hospital Rurality and Gene Expression Profiling for Early-Stage Breast Cancer among Iowa Residents (2010-2018).

Objective: Given the challenges rural cancer patients face in accessing cancer care as well as the slower diffusion and adoption of new medical technologies among rural providers, the aim of our study was to examine trends in gene expression profiling (GEP) testing and evaluate the association between hospital rurality and receipt of GEP testing. Methods: Data from the Iowa Cancer Registry (ICR) were used to identify women with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed breast cancer from 2010 through 2018 who met eligibility criteria for GEP testing. Patients were allocated to the hospitals where their most definitive surgical treatment was received, and Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes were used to categorize hospitals into urban (N = 43), large rural (N = 16), and small rural (N = 48). Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression to evaluate the association between hospital rurality and GEP test use, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. The association between test result and treatment received was assessed among patients who received Oncotype DX (ODX) testing. Results: Of 6,726 patients eligible for GEP test use, 46% (N = 3,069) underwent testing with 95% receiving ODX. While overall GEP testing rates increased over time from 42% between 2010 and 2012 to 51% between 2016 and 2018 (P trend < 0.0001), use continued to be the lowest among patients treated at hospitals in small rural areas. The odds of GEP testing remained significantly lower among patients treated at hospitals located in small rural areas (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.43-0.71), after adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. ODX recurrence scores were highly correlated with chemotherapy use across all strata of hospital rurality. Conclusions: GEP testing continues to be underutilized, especially among those treated at small rural hospitals. Targeted interventions aimed at increasing rates of GEP testing to ensure the appropriate use of adjuvant chemotherapy may improve health outcomes and lower treatment-related costs.

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy among women with a history of leukemia or lymphoma.

OBJECTIVE: Hypertension during pregnancy can adversely affect maternal and fetal health. This study assessed whether diagnosis of leukemia or lymphoma prior to pregnancy is associated with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy including gestational hypertension, preeclampsia and eclampsia. STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional study used two statewide population-based datasets that linked birth certificates with sources of maternal medical history: hospital discharges in California and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry data in Iowa. Birth years included 2007-2012 in California and 1989-2018 in Iowa. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was hypertension in pregnancy measured from combined birth certificate and hospital diagnoses in California (for gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, or eclampsia) and birth certificate information (gestational hypertension or eclampsia) in Iowa. RESULTS: After adjusting for maternal age, race, education, smoking, and plurality, those with a history of leukemia/lymphoma were at increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in Iowa (odds ratio (OR) = 1.86; 95% CI 1.07-3.23), but not in California (OR = 1.12; 95% CI 0.87-1.43). In sensitivity analysis restricting to more severe forms of hypertension in pregnancy (preeclampsia and eclampsia) in the California cohort, the effect estimate increased (OR = 1.29; 95% CI 0.96-1.74). CONCLUSION: In a population-based linked cancer registry-birth certificate study, an increased risk of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy was observed among leukemia or lymphoma survivors. Findings were consistent but non-significant in a second, more ethnically diverse study population with less precise cancer history data. Improved monitoring and surveillance may be warranted for leukemia or lymphoma survivors throughout their pregnancies.

The Influence of Hospital Characteristics on Patient Survival in Surgically Managed Metastatic Disease of Bone: An Analysis of the SEER-Medicare Linked Database.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated whether patients receiving surgical treatment for metastatic disease of bone (MDB) at hospitals with higher volume, medical school affiliation, or Commission on Cancer accreditation have superior outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database, we identified 9413 patients surgically treated for extremity MDB between 1992 and 2014 at the age of 66 years or older. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate the hazards ratios (HR) for 90-day and 1-year mortality and 30-day readmission according to the characteristics of the hospital where bone surgery was performed. RESULTS: We observed no notable differences in 90-day mortality, 1-year mortality, or 30-day readmission associated with hospital volume. Major medical school affiliation was associated with lower 90-day (HR: 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-0.96) and 1-year (HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.87-0.99) mortality after adjustments for demographic and tumor characteristics. Surgical treatment at Commission on Cancer accredited hospitals was associated with significantly higher risk of death at 90 days and 1 year after the surgery. This effect appeared to be driven by lung cancer patients (1-year HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.07-1.27). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest surgical management of MDB at lower-volume hospitals does not compromise survival or readmissions. There may be benefit to referral or consultation with an academic medical center in some tumor types or clinical scenarios.

Rural and urban differences in perceptions, behaviors, and health care disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to assess perceptions, health behaviors, and disruptions related to the COVID-19 pandemic in a largely rural, Midwestern state, and to examine differences between rural and urban respondents. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed August 2020 to a sample of 10,009 registered voters in Iowa ages 18-100 years, with oversampling from 6 select rural counties. Previously validated and tested items assessed COVID-19 precautions, health care disruptions, emotional reactions, health behavior changes, telehealth and experiences with the internet, and demographic characteristics. FINDINGS: There were 4,048 respondents (40% response rate); 65% were rural and 35% were urban residents. The average age of respondents was 58.3 years and 45% of respondents identified as female. Rural respondents reported less concern about COVID-19 in their community (29% vs 40%, P<.001) and lower perceived importance of social distancing (51% vs 64%, P<.001). Urban respondents more often reported experiencing disruption to daily living, stronger negative emotional reactions, and displayed more pronounced behavior change compared to their rural counterparts. For example, urban respondents reported more pandemic-related job losses (6% vs 4%, P = .05), disruptions to daily activities (48% vs 35%, P<.001), and use of telehealth services during the pandemic (24% vs 16%, P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents reported disruptions to normal activities, medical appointment cancellations, and emotional distress during the first 6 months of the pandemic. The impact of the pandemic on urban residents appeared to be greater than for rural respondents. Timing of pandemic spread and varying beliefs are potential explanations.

Rural-urban differences in secular trends of locoregional treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: A patterns of care analysis.

PRECIS: Omission of PORT following BCS remains high among rural patients despite evidence that PORT leads to a significant reduction in the risk of local recurrence. Further research is needed to examine the impact of rural residence on treatment choices and develop methods to ensure equitable care among all breast cancer patients. BACKGROUND: Despite national guidelines, debate exists among clinicians regarding the optimal approach to treatment for patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). While regional variation in practice patterns has been well documented, population-based information on rural-urban treatment differences is lacking. METHODS: Data from the SEER Patterns of Care studies were used to identify women diagnosed with histologically confirmed DCIS who underwent cancer-directed surgery in the years 1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using weighted multivariable logistic regression to evaluate cancer-directed surgery and use of post-operative radiation therapy (PORT). RESULTS: Of the 3337 patients who met inclusion criteria, 27% underwent mastectomy, 26% underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) without PORT, and 47% underwent BCS with PORT. After adjustment for other covariates, there was no difference in the likelihood of receiving mastectomy between rural and urban patients (aOR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.37-1.14). However, rural residents were more likely than urban residents to have mastectomy during 1991/1995 (aOR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.09-2.91; pinteraction  = 0.022). Across all diagnosis years, patients residing in rural areas were less likely to receive PORT following BCS compared to urban patients (aOR = 0.35; 95% CI 0.18-0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Omission of PORT following BCS remains high among rural patients despite evidence that PORT leads to a significant reduction in the risk of local recurrence. Further research is needed to examine the impact of rural residence on treatment choices and develop methods to ensure equitable care among all breast cancer patients.

Referrals and Decision-Making Considerations Involved in Selecting a Surgeon for Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Midwestern United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals. DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon. SETTINGS: Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry. PATIENTS: All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume). RESULTS: Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral. LIMITATIONS: This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations. CONCLUSION: Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).