Lung Cancer in Women: The Past, Present, and Future.

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death for women in multiple countries including the United States. Women are exposed to unique risk factors that remain largely understudied such as indoor pollution, second-hand tobacco exposure, biological differences, gender differences in tolerability and response to therapy in lung cancer, and societal gender roles, that create distinct survivorship needs. Women continue to lack representation in lung cancer clinical trials and are typically treated with data generated from majority male patient study populations, which may be inappropriate to extrapolate and generalize to females. Current lung cancer treatment and screening guidelines do not incorporate sex-specific differences and physicians also often do not account for gender differences when choosing treatments or discussing survivorship needs. To best provide targeted treatment approaches, greater representation of women in lung cancer clinical trials and further research is necessary. Clinicians should understand the unique factors and consequences associated with lung cancer in women; thus, a holistic approach that acknowledges environmental and societal factors is necessary.

The Democratization of Hematology-Oncology Medical Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Like many other aspects of hematology-oncology training, medical education experienced rapid changes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic that continue until today. We discuss some of the most transformative areas within medical education, including, but not limited to, educational philosophy; use of virtual resources; inter-institutional connections, shifts in clinical training; changes in recruitment practice; and attention to equity and diversity. Moreover, we add our own experiences to complement the limited literature addressing these topics. We conclude by highlighting some of the benefits of this unprecedented transformation in democratizing medical education that we hope endure beyond the pandemic.

Immunotherapy in Anal Cancer.

The incidence and mortality of squamous cell carcinoma of the anus has been gradually increasing globally over the last few decades. The evolution of different modalities, including immunotherapies, has changed the treatment paradigm of metastatic anal cancers. Chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and immune-modulating therapies form the backbone of treatment of anal cancer in various stages. Most anal cancers are linked to high-risk human papilloma virus (HPV) infections. HPV oncoproteins E6 and E7 are responsible for an anti-tumor immune response triggering the recruitment of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes. This has led to the development and utilization of immunotherapy in anal cancers. Current research in anal cancer is moving forward to discover ways to incorporate immunotherapy in the treatment sequencing in various stages of anal cancers. Immune checkpoint inhibitors alone or in combination, adoptive cell therapy, and vaccines are the areas of active investigations in anal cancer in both locally advanced and metastatic settings. Immunomodulating properties of non-immunotherapies are incorporated to enhance immune checkpoint inhibitors' effectiveness in some of the clinical trials. The aim of this review is to summarize the potential role of immunotherapy in anal squamous cell cancers and future directions.

Professional Challenges for United States Hematology/Oncology Trainees during COVID-19.

COVID-19 has been devastating for patients with cancer. In this commentary, we chronicle the pandemic's downstream impacts on United States hematology/oncology trainees in terms of professional development and career advancement. These include loss of access to clinical electives and protocol workshops, delays in research approval and execution, mentor shortages due to academic burnout, and obstacles with career transitions (most notably the post-fellowship job search). While certain silver linings from the pandemic have undoubtedly emerged, continued progress against COVID-19 will be essential to fully overcome the professional challenges it has created for the future hematology/oncology workforce.

Race/Ethnicity and Gender Representation in Hematology and Oncology Editorial Boards: What is the State of Diversity?

INTRODUCTION: Women and underrepresented groups in medicine hold few academic leadership positions in the field of hematology/oncology. In this study, we assessed gender and race/ethnicity representation in editorial board positions in hematology/oncology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Editorial leadership board members from 60 major journals in hematology and oncology were reviewed; 54 journals were included in the final analysis. Gender and race/ethnicity were determined based on publicly available data for Editor-in-Chief (EiC) and Second-in-Command (SiC) (including deputy, senior, or associate editors). Descriptive statistics and chi-squared were estimated. In the second phase of the study, editors were emailed a 4-item survey to self-identify their demographics. RESULTS: Out of 793 editorial board members, 72.6% were men and 27.4% were women. Editorial leadership were non-Hispanic white (71.1%) with Asian editorial board members representing the second largest majority at 22.5%. Women comprised only 15.9% of the EiC positions (90% White and 10% Asian). Women were about half as likely to be in the EiC position compared with men [pOR 0.47 (95% CI, 0.23-0.95, P = .03)]. Women represented 28.3% of SiC editorial positions. Surgical oncology had the lowest female representation at 2.3%. CONCLUSION: Women and minorities are significantly underrepresented in leadership roles on Editorial Boards in hematology/oncology journals. Importantly, the representation of minority women physicians in EiC positions is at an inexorable zero.

Lean Into the Uncomfortable: Using Trauma-Informed Care to Engage in Shared Decision-Making With Racial Minorities With Hematologic Malignancies.

Discussions involving racial health disparities must include pathways for engaging in shared decision-making with racial/ethnic minorities. Research demonstrates glaring racial and ethnic disparities when it comes to hematologic malignancies from the time of diagnosis to treatment and even at the end of life. Unfortunately, decision-making in these circumstances may be streamlined, given the urgency of the disease, prognostic uncertainty, and varying treatment options. Being diagnosed with cancer is undoubtedly a traumatic experience and a patient's race and/or ethnicity add an important dimension to their experience. The tenets of trauma-informed care (TIC) are anchored in recognizing that trauma can manifest in several ways and acknowledging the impact of past trauma on a patient's present and future behaviors. We argue that using a TIC approach may help hematologists create a space for decision-making while minimizing the risk of re-traumatization and perpetuating racial disparities. Using the foundation of TIC, an interprofessional team can begin addressing manifestations of trauma and hopefully mitigate racial and ethnic disparities.

The Matilda Effect: Underrecognition of Women in Hematology and Oncology Awards.

BACKGROUND: The proportion of women in the field of hematology and oncology (H&O) has increased over recent decades, but the representation of women in leadership positions remains poor. In an effort to close the gender gap in academia, it is important to report on such inequities in hopes to close these gaps and improve career development. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study of published award recipients from 1994 to 2019 from the seven major H&O societies in the world. Gender was determined based on publicly available data. The χ2 and Cochran-Armitage tests were used for data analysis. RESULTS: Of the 1,642 awardees over the past 26 years, 915 met inclusion criteria. Award recipients were overwhelmingly men (77.9%) and non-Hispanic White (84.7%). Women awardees received 30.3% of the humanistic and education-related awards, whereas only receiving 16.0% of basic science awards (p < .01). Women represent 35.6% of all hematologists and oncologists but only received 24.0% of awards given to these physicians (p = .004). Black, Hispanic, and Asian awardees represented 3.7%, 3.3%, and 6.8% of the total awardees, respectively. CONCLUSION: From 1994 to 2019, women were less likely to receive recognition awards from the seven major H&O societies studied compared with men. We also observed a considerably low proportion of minority awardees across all oncology subspecialties. Further studies examining how selection criteria favor either gender would be warranted in order to achieve equal representation in academic awards. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In this study, women and minority groups were found to be underrepresented amongst award recipients. Significant disparities were seen in disciplines that have been historically male predominant, such as basic sciences. As awards on an international level enhance academic resumes and assist with career advancement, it is important that awards are being given in an equitable manner. First steps to promote diversity and inclusion in academic medicine is reporting of gender and racial disparities in various areas of academia.

Videoconferencing Etiquette: Promoting Gender Equity During Virtual Meetings.

Considerable evidence has demonstrated that gender influences interactions during in-person meetings, most commonly, negatively impacting women and persons of color. Pervasive gender stereotypes about roles that were (and are) occupied by men and women lead to implicit assumptions about competency in said roles. For example, women may receive more negative verbal interruptions or nonverbal cues that undermine their authority as a leader, a stereotypically male-typed role. The coronavirus pandemic has led to the rapid rise in videoconferencing in professional interactions; however, little is known about videoconferencing etiquette and how gender bias permeates to this new setting. Although there are many benefits to the use of this technology, it has the potential to reinforce gender bias rooted in cultural and societal norms, gender stereotypes, and traditional gender roles. The well-documented implicit biases that have been shown to favor men over women during in-person meetings may translate to further gender gaps in leadership during virtual meetings. It is also possible that videoconferencing could be used to reduce gender bias, but until we have research to shine a light on this topic, this article provides 10 tips for promoting gender equity during virtual meetings.

Visitation policies at NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: Family/caregiver visitation provides critical support for patients confronting cancer and is associated with positive outcomes. However, the COVID-19 pandemic brought historic disruptions including widespread visitation restrictions. Here, we characterize in-depth the visitor policies of NCI-designated comprehensive cancer centers (CCCs) and analyze geographic/temporal patterns across CCCs. METHODS: The public-facing CCC websites, including archived webpages, were reviewed to abstract initial visitation policies and revisions, including end-of-life (EoL) exceptions and timing of visitation restrictions relative to regional lockdowns. Chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests were employed to analyze associations between geographic region, timing, and severity of restrictions. RESULTS: Most CCCs (n=43, 86%) enacted visitation restrictions between March 15 and April 15, 2020. About half barred all visitors for COVID-negative inpatients (n=24, 48%) or outpatients (n=26, 52%). Most (n=36, 72%) prohibited visitors for patients with confirmed/suspected COVID-19. Most (n=40, 80%) published EoL exceptions but the specifics were highly variable. The median time from initial restrictions to government-mandated lockdowns was 1 day, with a wide range (25 days before to 26 days after). There was no association between timing of initial restrictions and geographic location (p=0.14) or severity of inpatient policies (p=1.0), even among centers in the same city. Outpatient policies published reactively (after lockdown) were more restrictive than those published proactively (p=0.04). CONCLUSION: CCCs enacted strict but strikingly variable COVID-19 visitation restrictions, with important implications for patients/families seeking cancer care. A unified, evidence-based approach to visitation policies is needed to balance proven infection control measures with the needs of patients and families.

Healthcare Disparities and the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of Primary Language and Translations of Visitor Policies at NCI-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers.

CONTEXT: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused unprecedented disruptions to cancer care, including through strict hospital visitation policies. Since a substantial proportion of the U.S. population report a non-English language as their primary language, it is critical that information is disseminated in multiple languages. OBJECTIVES: To examine the availability of language translations of visitation restrictions on adult National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer centers (CCCs) Web sites. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of visitation policies abstracted from public-facing Web sites of CCCs in June 2020. Using U.S. Census data, CCC's city and state proportions of self-identifying Hispanic/Latinx population were categorized into three cohorts: low (<10%), moderate (10%-20%), and high (>20%). RESULTS: As of June 2020, all 50 CCCs published a COVID-19 visitation policy on their Web site. Of these, 33 (66%) posted policies only in English, whereas 17 (34%) included one or more non-English translations. A minority of CCCs published Spanish language resources, which did not differ based on state or city demographics: for example, only 42% (8 of 19), 10% (1 of 10), and 38% (8 of 21) of CCCs published Spanish language resources in cities with low, moderate, and high Hispanic/Latinx populations, respectively. CONCLUSION: `Most CCC's did not publish non-English language translations of their visitor policies. Even in cities and states with larger Hispanic/Latinx populations, most CCCs did not publish resources in Spanish. This study highlights a key opportunity to mitigate communication barriers and deliver culturally competent, patient-centered care.

Correction: Documenting Social Media Engagement as Scholarship: A New Model for Assessing Academic Accomplishment for the Health Professions.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/25070.].

Documenting Social Media Engagement as Scholarship: A New Model for Assessing Academic Accomplishment for the Health Professions.

BACKGROUND: The traditional model of promotion and tenure in the health professions relies heavily on formal scholarship through teaching, research, and service. Institutions consider how much weight to give activities in each of these areas and determine a threshold for advancement. With the emergence of social media, scholars can engage wider audiences in creative ways and have a broader impact. Conventional metrics like the h-index do not account for social media impact. Social media engagement is poorly represented in most curricula vitae (CV) and therefore is undervalued in promotion and tenure reviews. OBJECTIVE: The objective was to develop crowdsourced guidelines for documenting social media scholarship. These guidelines aimed to provide a structure for documenting a scholar's general impact on social media, as well as methods of documenting individual social media contributions exemplifying innovation, education, mentorship, advocacy, and dissemination. METHODS: To create unifying guidelines, we created a crowdsourced process that capitalized on the strengths of social media and generated a case example of successful use of the medium for academic collaboration. The primary author created a draft of the guidelines and then sought input from users on Twitter via a publicly accessible Google Document. There was no limitation on who could provide input and the work was done in a democratic, collaborative fashion. Contributors edited the draft over a period of 1 week (September 12-18, 2020). The primary and secondary authors then revised the draft to make it more concise. The guidelines and manuscript were then distributed to the contributors for edits and adopted by the group. All contributors were given the opportunity to serve as coauthors on the publication and were told upfront that authorship would depend on whether they were able to document the ways in which they met the 4 International Committee of Medical Journal Editors authorship criteria. RESULTS: We developed 2 sets of guidelines: Guidelines for Listing All Social Media Scholarship Under Public Scholarship (in Research/Scholarship Section of CV) and Guidelines for Listing Social Media Scholarship Under Research, Teaching, and Service Sections of CV. Institutions can choose which set fits their existing CV format. CONCLUSIONS: With more uniformity, scholars can better represent the full scope and impact of their work. These guidelines are not intended to dictate how individual institutions should weigh social media contributions within promotion and tenure cases. Instead, by providing an initial set of guidelines, we hope to provide scholars and their institutions with a common format and language to document social media scholarship.

Beware of Warfarin-Induced Skin Necrosis in the Setting of Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia.

Heparin-induced thrombocytopenia (HIT) and thrombosis affect a small minority of patients exposed to heparin. However, given the high proportion of patients who receive heparin during hospitalization, clinicians should be mindful to keep it on their differential. This case involves a 56-year-old woman who developed HIT during a prolonged hospitalization. She was started on a direct thrombin inhibitor, argatroban, until her platelets recovered, was bridged to warfarin, and later developed warfarin-induced skin necrosis (WISN). Patients with prolonged hospitalizations may have an inherent vitamin K deficiency, leading to erratic changes in international normalized ratio (INR). Currently, there are no guidelines to address very high supratherapeutic INR levels in this setting. Prompt diagnosis and close monitoring during treatment are essential to minimize the risk of morbidity and mortality.