Demographic disparities in receipt of care at a comprehensive cancer center.

BACKGROUND: National Cancer Institute cancer centers (NCICCs) provide specialized cancer care including precision oncology and clinical treatment trials. While these centers can offer novel therapeutic options, less is known about when patients access these centers or at what timepoint in their disease course they receive specialized care. This is especially important since precision diagnostics and receipt of the optimal therapy upfront can impact patient outcomes and previous research suggests that access to these centers may vary by demographic characteristics. Here, we examine the timing of patients' presentation at Moffitt Cancer Center (MCC) relative to their initial diagnosis across several demographic characteristics. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients who presented to MCC with breast, colon, lung, melanoma, and prostate cancers between December 2008 and April 2020. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics were obtained from the Moffitt Cancer Registry. The association between patient characteristics and the timing of patient presentation to MCC relative to the patient's cancer diagnosis was examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Black patients (median days = 510) had a longer time between diagnosis and presentation to MCC compared to Whites (median days = 368). Black patients were also more likely to have received their initial cancer care outside of MCC compared to White patients (odds ratio [OR] and 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.45 [1.32-1.60]). Furthermore, Hispanics were more likely to present to MCC at an advanced stage compared to non-Hispanic patients (OR [95% CI] = 1.28 [1.05-1.55]). CONCLUSIONS: We observed racial and ethnic differences in timing of receipt of care at MCC. Future studies should aim to identify contributing factors for the development of novel mitigation strategies and assess whether timing differences in referral to an NCICC correlate with long-term patient outcomes.

Trends in Patient Volume by Hospital Type and the Association of These Trends With Time to Cancer Treatment Initiation.

Importance: Increasing demand for cancer care may be outpacing the capacity of hospitals to provide timely treatment, particularly at referral centers such as National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated and academic centers. Whether the rate of patient volume growth has strained hospital capacity to provide timely treatment is unknown. Objective: To evaluate trends in patient volume by hospital type and the association between a hospital's annual patient volume growth and time to treatment initiation (TTI) for patients with cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective, hospital-level, cross-sectional study used longitudinal data from the National Cancer Database from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2016. Adult patients older than 40 years who had received a diagnosis of 1 of the 10 most common incident cancers and initiated their treatment at a Commission on Cancer-accredited hospital were included. Data were analyzed between December 19, 2019, and March 27, 2020. Exposures: The mean annual rate of patient volume growth at a hospital. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was TTI, defined as the number of days between diagnosis and the first cancer treatment. The association between a hospital's mean annual rate of patient volume growth and TTI was assessed using a linear mixed-effects model containing a patient volume × time interaction. The mean annual change in TTI over the study period by hospital type was estimated by including a hospital type × time interaction term. Results: The study sample included 4 218 577 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.0 [11.4] years; 56.6% women) treated at 1351 hospitals. From 2007 to 2016, patient volume increased 40% at NCI centers, 25% at academic centers, and 8% at community hospitals. In 2007, the mean TTI was longer at NCI and academic centers than at community hospitals (NCI: 50 days [95% CI, 48-52 days]; academic: 43 days [95% CI, 42-44 days]; community: 37 days [95% CI, 36-37 days]); however, the mean annual increase in TTI was greater at community hospitals (0.56 days; 95% CI, 0.49-0.62 days) than at NCI centers (-0.73 days; 95% CI, -0.95 to -0.51 days) and academic centers (0.14 days; 95% CI, 0.03-0.26 days). An annual volume growth rate of 100 patients, a level observed at less than 1% of hospitals, was associated with a mean increase in TTI of 0.24 days (95% CI, 0.18-0.29 days). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, from 2007 to 2016, across the studied cancer types, patients increasingly initiated their cancer treatment at NCI and academic centers. Although increases in patient volume at these centers outpaced that at community hospitals, faster growth was not associated with clinically meaningful treatment delays.

Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Representation in Leadership Positions at National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers.

Importance: Increasing diversity is beneficial for the health care system and patient outcomes; however, the current leadership gap in oncology remains largely unquantified. Objective: To evaluate the gender, racial, and ethnic makeup of the leadership teams of National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers and compare with the city populations served by each center. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cross-sectional study examined gender, race, and ethnicity of leadership teams via publicly available information for NCI-designated cancer centers and compared results with national and city US census population characteristics, as well as active physician data. Data were analyzed in August 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Racial, ethnic, and gender diversity (identified via facial recognition software and manual review) of leadership teams compared with institution rank, location, team member degree(s), and h-index. Results: All 63 NCI cancer centers were included in analysis, and all had identifiable leadership teams, with a total of 856 members. Photographs were not identified for 12 leaders (1.4%); of the remaining 844 leaders, race/ethnicity could not be identified for 7 (0.8%). Women make up 50.8% of the US population and 35.9% of active physicians; in NCI cancer centers, 36.3% (306 women) of cancer center leaders were women. Non-Hispanic White individuals comprise 60.6% of the US population and 56.2% of active physicians, but 82.2% of cancer center leaders (688 individuals) were non-Hispanic White. Both Black and Hispanic physicians were underrepresented when compared with their census populations (Black: 12.7% of US population, 5.0% of active physicians; Hispanic: 18.1% of US population, 5.8% of active physicians); however, Black and Hispanic individuals were even less represented in cancer center leadership positions (29 Black leaders [3.5%]; 32 Hispanic leaders [3.8%]). Asian physicians were overrepresented compared with their census population (5.6% of US population, 17.1% of active physicians); however, Asian individuals were underrepresented in leadership positions (92 Asian individuals [11.0%]). A total of 23 NCI cancer centers (36.5%) did not have a single Black or Hispanic member of their leadership team; 8 cancer centers (12.7%) had an all non-Hispanic White leadership team. A multivariate model found that leadership teams with more women (adjusted odds ratio, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.02-2.93]; P = .04) and institutions in the South (adjusted odds ratio, 2.31 [95% CI, 1.15 to 4.77]; P = .02) were more likely to have at least 1 Black or Hispanic leader. Pearson correlation analysis showed weak to moderate correlation between city Hispanic population and Hispanic representation on leadership teams (R = 0.5; P < .001), but no significant association between Black population and Black leadership was found. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that significant racial and ethnic disparities were present in cancer center leadership positions. Establishing policy, as well as pipeline programs, to address these disparities is essential for change.

Epidemiologic Research of Rare Cancers: Trends, Resources, and Challenges.

BACKGROUND: The goals of this project were to assess the status of NCI's rare cancer-focused population science research managed by the Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences (DCCPS), to develop a framework for evaluation of rare cancer research activities, and to review available resources to study rare cancers. METHODS: Cancer types with an overall age-adjusted incidence rate of less than 20 cases per 100,000 individuals were identified using NCI Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program data. SEER data were utilized to develop a framework based on statistical commonalities. A portfolio analysis of DCCPS-supported active grants and a review of three genomic databases were conducted. RESULTS: For the 45 rare cancer types included in the analysis, 123 active DCCPS-supported rare cancer-focused grants were identified, of which the highest percentage (18.7%) focused on ovarian cancer. The developed framework revealed five clusters of rare cancer types. The cluster with the highest number of grants (n = 43) and grants per cancer type (10.8) was the cluster that included cancer types of higher incidence, average to better survival, and high prevalence (in comparison with other rare cancers). Resource review revealed rare cancers are represented in available genomic resources, but to a lesser extent compared with more common cancers. CONCLUSIONS: This article provides an overview of the rare cancer-focused population sciences research landscape as well as information on gaps and opportunities. IMPACT: The findings of this article can be used to develop efficient and comprehensive strategies to accelerate rare cancer research.See related commentary by James V. Lacey Jr, p. 1300.

Lessons learned from the delivery of virtual integrative oncology interventions in clinical practice and research during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and subsequent need for disease transmission mitigation efforts have significantly altered the delivery of cancer care (e.g., rise of telemedicine), including within the field of integrative oncology. However, little has been described about how National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Centers have transformed integrative oncology care delivery in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this commentary is to describe the delivery of integrative oncology clinical services and conduct of research at The Leonard P. Zakim Center for Integrative Therapies and Healthy Living at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical services transitioned from an array of in-person appointment-based services, such as acupuncture and massage, and group programs, such as yoga and nutrition seminars to a combination of live-streamed and on-demand virtual group programs and one-on-one virtual appointments for services such as acupressure and self-care massage. Group program volume grew from 2189 in-person program patient visits in the 6 months prior to onset of the COVID pandemic to 16,366 virtual (e.g., live-streamed or on-demand) patient visits in the first 6 months of the pandemic. From a research perspective, two integrative oncology studies, focused on yoga and music therapy, respectively, were transitioned from in-person delivery to a virtual format. Participant accrual to these studies increased after the transition to virtual consent and intervention delivery. Overall, our clinical and research observations at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute suggest that the delivery of virtual integrative oncology treatments is feasible and appealing to patients. Trial Registration: NCT03824860 (Yoga); NCT03709225 (Music Therapy).

Cancer Information-seeking in an Age of COVID-19: Findings from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service.

Seeking cancer information is recognized as an important, life-saving behavior under normal circumstances. However, given the significant impact of COVID-19 on society, the healthcare system, and individuals and their families, it is important to understand how the pandemic has affected cancer information needs in a crisis context and, in turn, how public health agencies have responded to meeting the information needs of various audiences. Using data from the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS) - a long-standing, multi-channel resource for trusted cancer information in English and Spanish - this descriptive analysis explored differences in cancer information-seeking among cancer survivors, caregivers, tobacco users, and members of the general public during the onset and continuation of the COVID-19 pandemic (February - September 2020), specifically comparing interactions that involved a discussion of COVID-19 to those that did not. During the study period, COVID-19 discussions were more likely to involve survivors or caregivers compared to tobacco users and the general public. Specific patterns emerged across the four user types and their respective discussions of COVID-19 related to language of service, point of CIS access, stage on the cancer continuum, subject of interaction, cancer site discussed, and referrals provided by the CIS. These results provide insights that may help public health agencies deliver, prioritize, and tailor their messaging and response to specific audiences based on heightened health information needs during a crisis.

Enrollment of adolescents and young adults onto SWOG cancer research network clinical trials: A comparative analysis by treatment site and era.

BACKGROUND: Few adolescents and young adults (AYAs, 15-39 years old) enroll onto cancer clinical trials, which hinders research otherwise having the potential to improve outcomes in this unique population. Prior studies have reported that AYAs are more likely to receive cancer care in community settings. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has led efforts to increase trial enrollment through its network of NCI-designated cancer centers (NCICC) combined with community outreach through its Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP; replaced by the NCI Community Oncology Research Program in 2014). METHODS: Using AYA proportional enrollment (the proportion of total enrollments who were AYAs) as the primary outcome, we examined enrollment of AYAs onto SWOG therapeutic trials at NCICC, CCOP, and non-NCICC/non-CCOP sites from 2004 to 2013 by type of site, study period (2004-08 vs 2009-13), and patient demographics. RESULTS: Overall, AYA proportional enrollment was 10.1%. AYA proportional enrollment decreased between 2004-2008 and 2009-2013 (13.1% vs 8.5%, P < .001), and was higher at NCICCs than at CCOPs and non-NCICC/non-CCOPs (14.1% vs 8.3% and 9.2%, respectively; P < .001). AYA proportional enrollment declined significantly at all three site types. Proportional enrollment of AYAs who were Black or Hispanic was significantly higher at NCICCs compared with CCOPs or non-NCICC/non-CCOPs (11.5% vs 8.8, P = .048 and 11.5% vs 8.6%, P = .03, respectively). CONCLUSION: Not only did community sites enroll a lower proportion of AYAs onto cancer clinical trials, but AYA enrollment decreased in all study settings. Initiatives aimed at increasing AYA enrollment, particularly in the community setting with attention to minority status, are needed.

Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019.

The number of cancer survivors continues to increase in the United States because of the growth and aging of the population as well as advances in early detection and treatment. To assist the public health community in better serving these individuals, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute collaborate every 3 years to estimate cancer prevalence in the United States using incidence and survival data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries; vital statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics; and population projections from the US Census Bureau. Current treatment patterns based on information in the National Cancer Data Base are presented for the most prevalent cancer types. Cancer-related and treatment-related short-term, long-term, and late health effects are also briefly described. More than 16.9 million Americans (8.1 million males and 8.8 million females) with a history of cancer were alive on January 1, 2019; this number is projected to reach more than 22.1 million by January 1, 2030 based on the growth and aging of the population alone. The 3 most prevalent cancers in 2019 are prostate (3,650,030), colon and rectum (776,120), and melanoma of the skin (684,470) among males, and breast (3,861,520), uterine corpus (807,860), and colon and rectum (768,650) among females. More than one-half (56%) of survivors were diagnosed within the past 10 years, and almost two-thirds (64%) are aged 65 years or older. People with a history of cancer have unique medical and psychosocial needs that require proactive assessment and management by follow-up care providers. Although there are growing numbers of tools that can assist patients, caregivers, and clinicians in navigating the various phases of cancer survivorship, further evidence-based resources are needed to optimize care.

Tobacco Treatment Programs at National Cancer Institute-designated Cancer Centers: A Systematic Review and Online Audit.

OBJECTIVES: The main objectives of this study were to evaluate abstinence rates of tobacco treatment programs (TTPs) at National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer centers (DCCs) and to ascertain the number of NCI-DCCs with online references to TTPs. METHODS: Literature searches of Pubmed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were performed from their inception through January 2018 using keywords including cancer patients, cancer survivors, tobacco, smoking, cessation, and program. In total, 4094 articles were identified, 1450 duplicates were removed, 2644 candidate titles and abstracts were screened, and 210 selected full-text articles were independently reviewed by 2 authors. Three retrospective, single-institution cohort studies describing system-wide TTPs at 3 NCI-DCCs met inclusion criteria. Secondarily, online website audits of each NCI-DCC were performed to identify institutions with online evidence of a system-wide TTP servicing cancer patients. RESULTS: Among 62 NCI-DCCs, only 3 reported system-wide TTP outcomes. Abstinence rates ranged from 15% to 47%. Online website audit identified 47 NCI-DCCs maintaining system-wide TTPs. Seventeen TTPs were housed within the cancer center and 30 TTPs were offered by the primary affiliated institution; among the latter group, only 13 TTPs were identifiable via the NCI-DCC webpage. CONCLUSIONS: Most NCI-DCCs offer tobacco treatment services to cancer patients but very few have reported their results. Increased NCI-DCC TTP outcome publication and online presence are needed.

Meeting report from the joint IARC-NCI international cancer seminar series: a focus on colorectal cancer.

Despite significant progress in our understanding of the etiology, biology and genetics of colorectal cancer, as well as important clinical advances, it remains the third most frequently diagnosed cancer worldwide and is the second leading cause of cancer death. Based on demographic projections, the global burden of colorectal cancer would be expected to rise by 72% from 1.8 million new cases in 2018 to over 3 million in 2040 with substantial increases anticipated in low- and middle-income countries. In this meeting report, we summarize the content of a joint workshop led by the National Cancer Institute and the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which was held to summarize the important achievements that have been made in our understanding of colorectal cancer etiology, genetics, early detection and treatment and to identify key research questions that remain to be addressed.

National Cancer Institute Centers and Society of Surgical Oncology Cancer Research Synergy.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the influence of Surgical Society Oncology (SSO) membership and National Cancer Institute (NCI) status on the academic output of surgical faculty. METHODS: NCI cancer program status for each department of surgery was identified with publically available data, whereas SSO membership was determined for every faculty member. Academic output measures such as NIH funding, publications, and citations were analyzed in subsets by the type of cancer center (NCI comprehensive cancer center [CCC]; NCI cancer center [NCICC]; and non-NCI center) and SSO membership status. RESULTS: Of the surgical faculty, 2537 surgeons (61.9%) were from CCC, whereas 854 (20.8%) were from NCICC. At the CCC, 22.7% of surgeons had a history of or current NIH funding, compared with 15.8% at the NCICC and 11.8% at the non-NCI centers. The academic output of SSO members was higher at NCICC (52 ± 113 publications/1266 ± 3830 citations) and CCC (53 ± 92/1295 ± 4001) compared with nonmembers (NCICC: 26 ± 78/437 ± 2109; CCC: 37 ± 91/670 ± 3260), respectively, P < 0.05. Multivariate logistic regression revealed that SSO membership imparts an additional 22 publications and 270 citations, whereas NCI-designated CCC added 10 additional publications, but not citations. CONCLUSIONS: CCCs have significantly higher academic output and NIH funding. Recruitment of SSO members, a focus on higher performing divisions, and NIH funding are factors that non-NCI cancer centers may be able to focus on to improve academic productivity to aid in obtaining NCI designation.

Nutrition Education Services Described on National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Center Websites.

For women diagnosed with breast cancer, healthy weight and enhanced nutrition may improve outcomes. The goal of this study is to examine the nutrition education services available on National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Centers' websites. In 2017, websites of all 61 NCI-Designated Cancer Centers that provide adult clinical care were reviewed at least twice. Websites were analyzed for the existence and type of expert-directed nutrition education services for breast cancer survivors. Of the 61 websites analyzed, 49 (80%) provided information about nutrition education. Twenty (33%) included only nutrition counseling, three (5%) only nutrition classes, and 26 (42%) both counseling and classes. Forty-six websites included information about nutrition counseling; of these, 39 had an easily identifiable description. Thirty-seven class options were offered, 22% were specific to breast cancer, 16% to subgroups such as young women, 41% were nutrition-only classes, and 24% included skills education. Nutrition services are an important part of breast cancer treatment. This study demonstrated that most NCI-designated cancer centers offered counseling. However, the type of information that was offered varied and services were not always specific to patients with breast cancer. Further research is needed to confirm the presence of services, assess patient access, and demonstrate their efficacy in promoting optimal survivor outcomes.

Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, part I: National cancer statistics.

BACKGROUND: The American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States. METHODS: Incidence data were obtained from the CDC-funded and NCI-funded population-based cancer registry programs and compiled by NAACCR. Data on cancer deaths were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics System. Trends in age-standardized incidence and death rates for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types by sex, race, and ethnicity were estimated by joinpoint analysis and expressed as the annual percent change. Stage distribution and 5-year survival by stage at diagnosis were calculated for breast cancer, colon and rectum (colorectal) cancer, lung and bronchus cancer, and melanoma of the skin. RESULTS: Overall cancer incidence rates from 2008 to 2014 decreased by 2.2% per year among men but were stable among women. Overall cancer death rates from 1999 to 2015 decreased by 1.8% per year among men and by 1.4% per year among women. Among men, incidence rates during the most recent 5-year period (2010-2014) decreased for 7 of the 17 most common cancer types, and death rates (2011-2015) decreased for 11 of the 18 most common types. Among women, incidence rates declined for 7 of the 18 most common cancers, and death rates declined for 14 of the 20 most common cancers. Death rates decreased for cancer sites, including lung and bronchus (men and women), colorectal (men and women), female breast, and prostate. Death rates increased for cancers of the liver (men and women); pancreas (men and women); brain and other nervous system (men and women); oral cavity and pharynx (men only); soft tissue, including heart (men only); nonmelanoma skin (men only); and uterus. Incidence and death rates were higher among men than among women for all racial and ethnic groups. For all cancer sites combined, black men and white women had the highest incidence rates compared with other racial groups, and black men and black women had the highest death rates compared with other racial groups. Non-Hispanic men and women had higher incidence and mortality rates than those of Hispanic ethnicity. Five-year survival for cases diagnosed from 2007 through 2013 ranged from 100% (stage I) to 26.5% (stage IV) for female breast cancer, from 88.1% (stage I) to 12.6% (stage IV) for colorectal cancer, from 55.1% (stage I) to 4.2% (stage IV) for lung and bronchus cancer, and from 99.5% (stage I) to 16% (stage IV) for melanoma of the skin. Among children, overall cancer incidence rates increased by 0.8% per year from 2010 to 2014, and overall cancer death rates decreased by 1.5% per year from 2011 to 2015. CONCLUSIONS: For all cancer sites combined, cancer incidence rates decreased among men but were stable among women. Overall, there continue to be significant declines in cancer death rates among both men and women. Differences in rates and trends by race and ethnic group remain. Progress in reducing cancer mortality has not occurred for all sites. Examining stage distribution and 5-year survival by stage highlights the potential benefits associated with early detection and treatment. Cancer 2018;124:2785-2800. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Estimating Usual Dietary In take From National Health and Nut rition Examination Survey Data Using the National Cancer Institute Method.

Dietary recommendations are intended to be met based on dietary intake over long periods, as associations between diet and health result from habitual intake, not a single eating occasion or day of intake. Measuring usual intake directly is impractical for large population-based surveys due to the respondent burden associated with reporting habitual intake over longer periods. Therefore, analytical techniques were developed to estimate usual intake using as few as 2 days of 24-hour dietary recall data. With National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data, this report demonstrates how to estimate usual intake using the National Cancer Institute (NCI). This report demonstrates how to estimate the usual intake of nutrients consumed daily or episodically using NHANES data. Means, percentiles, and the percentages above or below specified Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) values for given day, within-person mean (WPM), and estimates of usual intake are presented. Consistent with previous analyses, mean intakes were similar across methods. However, the distributions estimated by nonusual intake methods were wider compared with the NCI Method, which can lead to misclassification of the percentage of the population above or below certain DRIs. Use of NHANES data to examine the proportion of the population at risk of insufficiency or excess of certain nutrients, with methods like given day and WPM that do not address within-person variation, may lead to biased estimates.

Decreased early mortality associated with the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers in California.

BACKGROUND: To the authors' knowledge, few population-based studies to date have evaluated the association between location of care, complications with induction therapy, and early mortality in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). METHODS: Using linked data from the California Cancer Registry and Patient Discharge Dataset (1999-2014), the authors identified adult (aged ≥18 years) patients with AML who received inpatient treatment within 30 days of diagnosis. A propensity score was created for treatment at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center (NCI-CC). Inverse probability-weighted, multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine associations between location of care, complications, and early mortality (death ≤60 days from diagnosis). RESULTS: Of the 7007 patients with AML, 1762 (25%) were treated at an NCI-CC. Patients with AML who were treated at NCI-CCs were more likely to be aged ≤65 years, live in higher socioeconomic status neighborhoods, have fewer comorbidities, and have public health insurance. Patients treated at NCI-CCs had higher rates of renal failure (23% vs 20%; P = .010) and lower rates of respiratory failure (11% vs 14%; P = .003) and cardiac arrest (1% vs 2%; P = .014). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, treatment at an NCI-CC was associated with lower early mortality (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.57). The impact of complications on early mortality did not differ by location of care except for higher early mortality noted among patients with respiratory failure treated at non-NCI-CCs. CONCLUSIONS: The initial treatment of adult patients with AML at NCI-CCs is associated with a 53% reduction in the odds of early mortality compared with treatment at non-NCI-CCs. Lower early mortality may result from differences in hospital or provider experience and supportive care. Cancer 2018;124:1938-45. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Most National Cancer Institute-Designated Cancer Center Websites Do Not Provide Survivors with Information About Cancer Rehabilitation Services.

This study is the first to evaluate the existence and quality of patient-related cancer rehabilitation content on the websites of National Cancer Institute (NCI)-Designated Cancer Centers. In 2016, a team of cancer rehabilitation physicians (physiatrists) conducted an analysis of the patient-related rehabilitation content on the websites of all NCI-Designated Cancer Centers that provide clinical care (N = 62 of 69). The main outcome measures included qualitative rating of the ease of locating descriptions of cancer rehabilitation services on each website, followed by quantitative rating of the quality of the cancer rehabilitation descriptions found. More than 90% of NCI-Designated Cancer Centers providing clinical care did not have an easily identifiable patient-focused description of or link to cancer rehabilitation services on their website. Use of a website's search box and predetermined terms yielded an additional 13 descriptions (21%). Therefore, designers of nearly 70% of the websites evaluated overlooked an opportunity to present a description of cancer rehabilitation services. Moreover, only 8% of the websites included accurate and detailed information that referenced four core rehabilitation services (physiatry and physical, occupational and speech therapy). Further research is needed to confirm the presence of cancer rehabilitation services and evaluate access to these types of services at NCI-Designated Cancer Centers providing clinical care.

Disparities in Geographic Accessibility of National Cancer Institute Cancer Centers in the United States.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Centers form the backbone of the cancer care system in the United States since their inception in the early 1970s. Most studies on their geographic accessibility used primitive measures, and did not examine the disparities across urbanicity or demographic groups. This research uses an advanced accessibility method, termed "2-step floating catchment area (2SFCA)" and implemented in Geographic Information Systems (GIS), to capture the degree of geographic access to NCI Cancer Centers by accounting for competition intensity for the services and travel time between residents and the facilities. The results indicate that urban advantage is pronounced as the average accessibility is highest in large central metro areas, declines to large fringe metro, medium metro, small metro, micropolitan and noncore rural areas. Population under the poverty line are disproportionally concentrated in lower accessibility areas. However, on average Non-Hispanic White have the lowest geographic accessibility, followed by Hispanic, Non-Hispanic Black and Asian, and the differences are statistically significant. The "reversed racial disadvantage" in NCI Cancer Center accessibility seems counterintuitive but is consistent with an influential prior study; and it is in contrast to the common observation of co-location of concentration of minority groups and people under the poverty line.

Institutional Scientific Review of Cancer Clinical Research Protocols: A Unique Requirement That Affects Activation Timelines.

PURPOSE: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) requirement that clinical trials at NCI-designated cancer centers undergo institutional scientific review in addition to institutional review board evaluation is unique among medical specialties. We sought to evaluate the effect of this process on protocol activation timelines. METHODS: We analyzed oncology clinical trials that underwent full board review by the Harold C. Simmons Comprehensive Cancer Center Protocol Review and Monitoring Committee (PRMC) from January 1, 2009, through June 30, 2013. We analyzed associations between trial characteristics, PRMC decisions, protocol modifications, and process timelines using the χ2 test, Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon rank sum test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 226 trials were analyzed. Of these, 77% were industry sponsored and 23% were investigator initiated. The median time from submission to PRMC approval was 55 days. The length of review was associated with trial phase, timing of approval, and number of committee changes/clarifications requested. The median process time was 35 days for those approved at first decision, 68 days for second decision, and 116 days for third decision ( P < .001). The median process time was 39 days if no changes/clarifications were requested, 64 days for one to three changes/clarifications, and 73 days for four or more changes/clarifications ( P < .001). Requested changes/clarifications had a greater effect on industry-sponsored trials than on investigator-initiated trials. CONCLUSION: NCI-mandated institutional scientific review of oncology clinical trials contributes substantially to protocol activation timelines. Further evaluation of this process and the value added to research quality is warranted.

Making the Case for Investment in Rural Cancer Control: An Analysis of Rural Cancer Incidence, Mortality, and Funding Trends.

Estimates of those living in rural counties vary from 46.2 to 59 million, or 14% to 19% of the U.S. POPULATION: Rural communities face disadvantages compared with urban areas, including higher poverty, lower educational attainment, and lack of access to health services. We aimed to demonstrate rural-urban disparities in cancer and to examine NCI-funded cancer control grants focused on rural populations. Estimates of 5-year cancer incidence and mortality from 2009 to 2013 were generated for counties at each level of the rural-urban continuum and for metropolitan versus nonmetropolitan counties, for all cancers combined and several individual cancer types. We also examined the number and foci of rural cancer control grants funded by NCI from 2011 to 2016. Cancer incidence was 447 cases per 100,000 in metropolitan counties and 460 per 100,000 in nonmetropolitan counties (P < 0.001). Cancer mortality rates were 166 per 100,000 in metropolitan counties and 182 per 100,000 in nonmetropolitan counties (P < 0.001). Higher incidence and mortality in rural areas were observed for cervical, colorectal, kidney, lung, melanoma, and oropharyngeal cancers. There were 48 R- and 3 P-mechanism rural-focused grants funded from 2011 to 2016 (3% of 1,655). Further investment is needed to disentangle the effects of individual-level SES and area-level factors to understand observed effects of rurality on cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 26(7); 992-7. ©2017 AACR.