COVID-19 Outbreak in an Amish Community - Ohio, May 2020.

In the United States, outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), were initially reported in densely populated urban areas (1); however, outbreaks have since been reported in rural communities (2,3). Rural residents might be at higher risk for severe COVID-19-associated illness because, on average, they are older, have higher prevalences of underlying medical conditions, and have more limited access to health care services.* In May, after a cluster of seven COVID-19 cases was identified in a rural Ohio Amish community, access to testing was increased. Among 30 additional residents tested by real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR; TaqPath COVID-19 Combo Kit),† 23 (77%) received positive test results for SARS-CoV-2. Rapid and sustained transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was associated with multiple social gatherings. Informant interviews revealed that community members were concerned about having to follow critical mitigation strategies, including social distancing§ and mask wearing.¶ To help reduce the ongoing transmission risk in a community, state and county health department staff members and community leaders need to work together to develop, deliver, and promote culturally responsive health education messages to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission and ensure that access to testing services is timely and convenient. Understanding the dynamics of close-knit communities is crucial to reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

Examining comprehensive cancer control partnerships, plans, and program interventions: successes and lessons learned from a utilization-focused evaluation.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program has experienced exponential growth over the past 20 years due to the coordination and collaboration of many stakeholders to sustain multisector coalitions, develop and execute data-driven plans, and successfully implement evidenced-based interventions across the United States. These stakeholders have worked tirelessly to address the burden of cancer by employing strategies that promote healthy behaviors to reduce cancer risk, facilitate screening, and address the needs of cancer survivors. The interaction between the comprehensive cancer control program and the coalitions to engage in this work has been coined the 3Ps: the partnership, the CCC plan, and CCC program interventions. This article describes the efforts to evaluate the growth of the comprehensive cancer control movement, especially as it pertains to coalition contribution, plan priority development and implementation, and intervention implementation. It describes successes and lessons learned from an evaluation whose findings can be used to bolster and sustain comprehensive cancer control programs and coalitions across the U.S.

Comprehensive cancer control in the U.S.: summarizing twenty years of progress and looking ahead.

In order to celebrate the accomplishments of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP), the Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partners (CCCNP) developed this Special Issue on Cancer Causes and Control. This, the third Special Issue on Comprehensive Cancer Control (CCC), is a reflection of 20 years of building successful partnerships to prevent and control cancer; planning and implementing strategic cancer control; collaborating to address national cancer prevention and control priorities; evaluating efforts; sharing successes; and, in later years, serving as a model for global cancer control planning and implementation. The CDC currently supports cancer control planning and implementation in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, eight tribes or tribal organizations, and seven Pacific Island Jurisdictions and U.S. territories through the NCCCP. CCC is an approach that brings together multi-sector partners to address the cancer burden in a community collectively by leveraging existing resources and identifying and addressing cancer related issues and needs. The Comprehensive Cancer Control National Partnership (CCCNP), a partnership of national organizations, has been committed to supporting comprehensive cancer control efforts since 1999. We summarize the efforts described in this Special Issue. We also describe opportunities and critical elements to continue the momentum for comprehensive cancer control well into the future.

The history and use of cancer registry data by public health cancer control programs in the United States.

Because cancer registry data provide a census of cancer cases, registry data can be used to: 1) define and monitor cancer incidence at the local, state, and national levels; 2) investigate patterns of cancer treatment; and 3) evaluate the effectiveness of public health efforts to prevent cancer cases and improve cancer survival. The purpose of this article is to provide a broad overview of the history of cancer surveillance programs in the United States, and illustrate the expanding ways in which cancer surveillance data are being made available and contributing to cancer control programs. The article describes the building of the cancer registry infrastructure and the successful coordination of efforts among the 2 federal agencies that support cancer registry programs, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. The major US cancer control programs also are described, including the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program, the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, and the Colorectal Cancer Control Program. This overview illustrates how cancer registry data can inform public health actions to reduce disparities in cancer outcomes and may be instructional for a variety of cancer control professionals in the United States and in other countries. Cancer 2017;123:4969-76. Published 2017. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.

Human Papillomavirus Vaccine as an Anticancer Vaccine: Collaborative Efforts to Promote Human Papillomavirus Vaccine in the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program.

Widespread use of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine has the potential to reduce incidence from HPV-associated cancers. However, vaccine uptake among adolescents remains well below the Healthy People 2020 targets. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) awardees are well positioned to work with immunization programs to increase vaccine uptake. The CDC chronic disease management information system was queried for objectives and activities associated with HPV vaccine that were reported by NCCCP awardees from 2013 to 2016 as part of program reporting requirements. A content analysis was conducted on the query results to categorize interventions according to strategies outlined in The Guide to Community Preventive Services and the 2014 President's Cancer Panel report. Sixty-two percent of NCCCP awardees had planned or implemented at least one activity since 2013 to address low HPV vaccination coverage in their jurisdictions. Most NCCCP awardees (86%) reported community education activities, while 65% reported activities associated with provider education. Systems-based strategies such as client reminders or provider assessment and feedback were each reported by less than 25% of NCCCP awardees. Many NCCCP awardees report planning or implementing activities to address low HPV vaccination coverage, often in conjunction with state immunization programs. NCCCP awardees can play a role in increasing HPV vaccination coverage through their cancer prevention and control expertise and access to partners in the healthcare community.

Prevalence of Smoking and Obesity Among U.S. Cancer Survivors: Estimates From the National Health Interview Survey, 2008-2012.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To describe smoking and obesity prevalence among male and female cancer survivors in the United States.
. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
. SETTING: Household interviews.
. SAMPLE: 9,753 survey respondents who reported ever having a malignancy, excluding nonmelanoma skin cancers. 
. METHODS: Data from the National Health Interview Survey (2008-2012) were used to calculate weighted smoking status prevalence estimates. Cross-tabulations of smoking and weight status were produced, along with Wald chi-square tests and linear contrasts.
. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: Cancer history, smoking status, obesity status, gender, age, and age at diagnosis.
. FINDINGS: Seventeen percent of cancer survivors reported current smoking. Female survivors had higher rates of current smoking than males, particularly in the youngest age category. Male survivors who currently smoked had lower obesity prevalence rates than males who previously smoked or never smoked. Among female survivors, 31% were obese and no significant differences were seen in obesity prevalence by smoking status for all ages combined. 
. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the variation in smoking status and weight by age and gender. Smoking interventions may need to be targeted to address barriers specific to subgroups of cancer survivors.
. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses can be instrumental in ensuring that survivors receive comprehensive approaches to address both weight and tobacco use to avoid trading one risk for another.

When performance management works: a study of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program.

BACKGROUND: Little empirical evidence exists about the effectiveness of performance management systems in government. This study assessed the effectiveness of the performance management system of the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program (NBCCEDP) and explored why it works. METHODS: Generalized estimating equation models were used to assess change in program performance after the implementation of a performance management system. In addition, qualitative case study data including observations, interviews, and document review were analyzed using inductive methods. RESULTS: Five of the 7 indicators tested had statistically significant increases in performance postimplementation. Case study results suggest that the system is characterized by high-quality data, measures viewed by grantees as meaningful and fair, and institutionalized data use. CONCLUSIONS: Several factors help to explain the system's effectiveness including characteristics of the NBCCEDP program (eg, service delivery program), qualities of the indicators (eg, process level), financial investment in the system, and a culture of data use.

Gynecologic cancer prevention and control in the National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program: progress, current activities, and future directions.

Gynecologic cancer confers a large burden among women in the United States. Several evidence-based interventions are available to reduce the incidence, morbidity, and mortality from these cancers. The National Comprehensive Cancer Control Program (NCCCP) is uniquely positioned to implement these interventions in the US population. This review discusses progress and future directions for the NCCCP in preventing and controlling gynecologic cancer.

An update on tobacco control initiatives in comprehensive cancer control plans.

INTRODUCTION: Comprehensive cancer control (CCC) coalitions address tobacco use, the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, through formal plans to guide tobacco control activities and other cancer prevention strategies. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs (Best Practices) and The Guide to Community Preventive Services (The Community Guide) are used to assist with this effort. We examined CCC plans to determine the extent to which they followed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) tobacco control and funding recommendations. METHODS: We obtained 69 CCC plans, current as of August 1, 2011, to determine which CDC recommendations from Best Practices and The Community Guide were incorporated. Data were abstracted through a content review and key word search and then summarized across the plans with dichotomous indicators. Additionally, we analyzed plans for inclusion of tobacco control funding goals and strategies. RESULTS: CCC plans incorporated a mean 4.5 (standard deviation [SD], 2.1) of 5 recommendations from Best Practices and 5.2 (SD, 0.9) of 10 recommendations from The Community Guide. Two-thirds of plans (66.7%) addressed funding for tobacco control as a strategy or action item; 47.8% of those plans (31.9% of total) defined a specific, measurable funding goal. CONCLUSION: Although most CCC plans follow CDC-recommended tobacco control recommendations and funding levels, not all recommendations are addressed by every plan and certain recommendations are addressed in varying numbers of plans. Clearer prioritization of tobacco control recommendations by CDC may improve the extent to which they are followed and therefore maximize their public health benefit.