Baseline characteristics and recruitment for SWOG S1820: altering intake, managing bowel symptoms in survivors of rectal cancer (AIMS-RC).

PURPOSE: Many survivors of rectal cancer experience persistent bowel dysfunction. There are few evidence-based symptom management interventions to improve bowel control. The purpose of this study is to describe recruitment and pre-randomization baseline sociodemographic, health status, and clinical characteristics for SWOG S1820, a trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms in Rectal Cancer (AIMS-RC) intervention. METHODS: SWOG S1820 aimed to determine the preliminary efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of AIMS-RC, a symptom management intervention for bowel health, comparing intervention to attention control. Survivors with a history of cancers of the rectosigmoid colon or rectum, within 6-24 months of primary treatment completion, with a post-surgical permanent ostomy or anastomosis, and over 18 years of age were enrolled. Outcomes included total bowel function, low anterior resection syndrome, quality of life, motivation for managing bowel health, self-efficacy for managing symptoms, positive and negative affect, and study feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: The trial completed accrual over a 29-month period and enrolled 117 participants from 34 institutions across 17 states and one US Pacific territory. At baseline, most enrolled participants reported self-imposed diet adjustments after surgery, persistent dietary intolerances, and bowel discomfort post-treatment, with high levels of constipation and diarrhea (grades 1-4). CONCLUSIONS: SWOG S1820 was able to recruit, in a timely manner, a study cohort that is demographically representative of US survivors of rectal cancer. Baseline characteristics illustrate the connection between diet/eating and bowel symptoms post-treatment, with many participants reporting diet adjustments and persistent inability to be comfortable with dietary intake. GOV REGISTRATION DATE: 12/19/2019. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT#04205955.

SWOG S1820: A pilot randomized trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Bowel Symptoms Intervention in Survivors of Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Survivors of rectal cancer experience persistent bowel dysfunction after treatments. Dietary interventions may be an effective approach for symptom management and posttreatment diet quality. SWOG S1820 was a pilot randomized trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms in Rectal Cancer (AIMS-RC) intervention for bowel dysfunction in survivors of rectal cancer. METHODS: Ninety-three posttreatment survivors were randomized to the AIMS-RC group (N = 47) or the Healthy Living Education attention control group (N = 46) after informed consent and completion of a prerandomization run-in. Outcome measures were completed at baseline and at 18 and 26 weeks postrandomization. The primary end point was total bowel function score, and exploratory end points included low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score, quality of life, dietary quality, motivation, self-efficacy, and positive/negative affect. RESULTS: Most participants were White and college educated, with a mean age of 55.2 years and median time since surgery of 13.1 months. There were no statistically significant differences in total bowel function score by group, with the AIMS-RC group demonstrating statistically significant improvements in the exploratory end points of LARS (p = .01) and the frequency subscale of the bowel function index (p = .03). The AIMS-RC group reported significantly higher acceptability of the study. CONCLUSIONS: SWOG S1820 did not provide evidence of benefit from the AIMS-RC intervention relative to the attention control. Select secondary end points did demonstrate improvements. The study was highly feasible and acceptable for participants in the National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program. Findings provide strong support for further refinement and effectiveness testing of the AIMS-RC intervention.

The need for One Health systems-thinking approaches to understand multiscale dissemination of antimicrobial resistance.

Although the effects of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are most obvious at clinical treatment failure, AMR evolution, transmission, and dispersal happen largely in environmental settings, for example within farms, waterways, livestock, and wildlife. We argue that systems-thinking, One Health approaches are crucial for tackling AMR, by understanding and predicting how anthropogenic activities interact within environmental subsystems, to drive AMR emergence and transmission. Innovative computational methods integrating big data streams (eg, from clinical, agricultural, and environmental monitoring) will accelerate our understanding of AMR, supporting decision making. There are challenges to accessing, integrating, synthesising, and interpreting such complex, multidimensional, heterogeneous datasets, including the lack of specific metrics to quantify anthropogenic AMR. Moreover, data confidentiality, geopolitical and cultural variation, surveillance gaps, and science funding cause biases, uncertainty, and gaps in AMR data and metadata. Combining systems-thinking with modelling will allow exploration, scaling-up, and extrapolation of existing data. This combination will provide vital understanding of the dynamic movement and transmission of AMR within and among environmental subsystems, and its effects across the greater system. Consequently, strategies for slowing down AMR dissemination can be modelled and compared for efficacy and cost-effectiveness.

Differential metabolic responses in bold and shy sea anemones during a simulated heatwave.

As climate change-induced heatwaves become more common, phenotypic plasticity at multiple levels is a key mitigation strategy by which organisms can optimise selective outcomes. In ectotherms, changes to both metabolism and behaviour can help alleviate thermal stress. Nonetheless, no study in any ectotherm has yet empirically investigated how changing temperatures affect among-individual differences in the associations between these traits. Using the beadlet anemone (Actinia equina), an intertidal species from a thermally heterogeneous environment, we investigated how individual metabolic rates, linked to morphotypic differences in A. equina, and boldness were related across changing temperatures. A crossed-over design and a temporal control were used to test the same individuals at a non-stressful temperature, 13°C, and under a simulated heatwave at 21°C. At each temperature, short-term repeated measurements of routine metabolic rate (RMR) and a single measurement of a repeatable boldness-related behaviour, immersion response time (IRT), were made. Individual differences, but not morphotypic differences, were highly predictive of metabolic plasticity, and the plasticity of RMR was associated with IRT. At 13°C, shy animals had the highest metabolic rates, while at 21°C, this relationship was reversed. Individuals that were bold at 13°C also exhibited the highest metabolic rates at 21°C. Additional metabolic challenges during heatwaves could be detrimental to fitness in bold individuals. Equally, lower metabolic rates at non-stressful temperatures could be necessary for optimal survival as heatwaves become more common. These results provide novel insight into the relationship between metabolic and behavioural plasticity, and its adaptive implications in a changing climate.

Intervention Nonadherence in the TrACER (S1415CD) Study: A Pragmatic Randomized Trial of a Standardized Order Entry for CSF Prescribing.

PURPOSE: We conducted a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial to test whether a guideline-based standing order entry (SOE) improves use of primary prophylactic CSF (PP-CSF) prescribing for patients receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy. We investigated variability in adherence to the intervention. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial among 32 oncology clinics from the NCI Community Oncology Research Program. Clinics were randomized 3:1 to a guideline-based PP-CSF SOE or usual care. Among SOE sites, automated orders for PP-CSF were included for regimens at high risk for febrile neutropenia (FN) and an alert not to use PP-CSF for low FN risk. A secondary 1:1 randomization was done among intervention sites to either SOE to prescribe or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF for patients receiving intermediate risk-regimens. Providers were allowed to override the SOE. RESULTS: Overall, PP-CSF use among patients receiving high FN risk treatment was high and not different between arms; however, rates of PP-CSF use varied widely by site, ranging from 48.6% to 100%. Among those receiving low FN risk regimens, PP-CSF use was low and not different between arms; however, PP-CSF use ranged from 0% to 19.4% across sites. In the intermediate-risk substudy, PP-CSF was five-fold higher among sites randomized to SOE; however, there was considerable variability in adherence to intervention assignment: PP-CSF use ranged from 0% to 75% among sites randomized to SOE. Despite an alert to not prescribe, PP-CSF prescribing ranged from 0% to 33%. CONCLUSION: In this randomized pragmatic trial aimed at improving PP-CSF prescribing, there was substantial variability in site adherence to the intervention assignment. Although the ability to opt out of the intervention is a feature of pragmatic trials, planning to estimate nonadherence is critical to ensure adequate power.

Universal Viral Screening of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Cancer in the United States: A Cost-efficiency Evaluation.

Recommendations for universal screening of patients with cancer for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are inconsistent. A recent multisite screening study (S1204) from the SWOG Cancer Research Network found that a substantial number of patients with newly diagnosed cancer had previously unknown viral infections. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-efficiency of universal screening of patients with newly diagnosed cancer. We estimated the cost-efficiency of universal screening of new cancer cases for HBV, HCV, or HIV, expressed as cost per virus detected, from the health care payer perspective. The prevalence of each virus among this cohort was derived from S1204. Direct medical expenditures included costs associated with laboratory screening tests. Costs per case detected were estimated for each screening strategy. Secondary analysis examined the cost-efficiency of screening patients whose viral status at cancer diagnosis was unknown. Among the possible options for universal screening, screening for HBV alone ($581), HCV alone ($782), HBV and HCV ($631) and HBV, HCV, and HIV ($841) were most efficient in terms of cost per case detected. When screening was restricted to patients with unknown viral status, screening for HBV alone ($684), HBV and HCV ($872), HBV and HIV ($1,157), and all three viruses ($1,291) were most efficient in terms of cost per newly detected case. Efficient viral testing strategies represent a relatively modest addition to the overall cost of managing a patient with cancer. Screening for HBV, HCV, and HIV infections may be reasonable from both a budget and clinical standpoint. SIGNIFICANCE: Screening patients with cancer for HBV, HCV, and HIV is inconsistent in clinical practice despite national recommendations and known risks of complications from viral infection. Our study shows that while costs of viral screening strategies vary by choice of tests, they present a modest addition to the cost of managing a patient with cancer.

Impact of treatment experience on patient knowledge of colony-stimulating factors among patients receiving cancer chemotherapy: evidence from S1415CD-a large pragmatic trial.

PURPOSE: Primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (PP-CSFs) are prescribed alongside chemotherapy regimens that carry a significant risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). As part of S1415CD, a prospective, pragmatic trial evaluating the impact of automated orders to improve PP-CSF prescribing, we evaluated patients' baseline knowledge of PP-CSF and whether that knowledge improved following the first cycle of chemotherapy. METHODS: Adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small-cell lung cancer initiating chemotherapy were enrolled in S1415CD between January 2016 and April 2020. Eight questions assessing knowledge of CSF indications, risks, benefits, and out-of-pocket costs were included in a baseline survey and in a follow-up survey at the end of the first cycle of chemotherapy. Responses were stratified by the trial arm and whether chemotherapy was low, intermediate, or high FN risk. RESULTS: Of the 3605 eligible patients, 3580 (99.3%) completed the baseline survey, and 3420 (95.5%) completed the follow-up survey. At baseline, 803 (22.4%) patients responded "Don't know" to all 8 questions, and all patients averaged 2.75 correct questions. At follow-up, knowledge increased by 0.34 in the high-FN-risk group (p < 0.001) but declined for the other FN-risk groups. In multivariate analysis, receiving a high-FN-risk regimen and younger age were significantly associated with knowledge improvement. CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy patients had poor knowledge of PP-CSF that improved only modestly among recipients of high-FN-risk chemotherapy. Further efforts to inform patients about the risks, benefits, and costs of PP-CSF may be warranted, particularly for those in whom prophylaxis is indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02728596, April 6, 2016.

Surgical versus non-surgical management for patients with malignant bowel obstruction (S1316): a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial.

BACKGROUND: Malignant small bowel obstruction has a poor prognosis and is associated with multiple related symptoms. The optimal treatment approach is often unclear. We aimed to compare surgical versus non-surgical management with the aim to determine the optimal approach for managing malignant bowel obstruction. METHODS: S1316 was a pragmatic comparative effectiveness trial done within the National Cancer Trials Network at 30 hospital and cancer research centres in the USA, Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. Participants had an intra-abdominal or retroperitoneal primary cancer confirmed via pathological report and malignant bowel disease; were aged 18 years or older with a Zubrod performance status 0-2 within 1 week before admission; had a surgical indication; and treatment equipoise. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to surgical or non-surgical treatment using a dynamic balancing algorithm, balancing on primary tumour type. Patients who declined consent for random assignment were offered a prospective observational patient choice pathway. The primary outcome was the number of days alive and out of the hospital (good days) at 91 days. Analyses were based on intention-to-treat linear, logistic, and Cox regression models combining data from both pathways and adjusting for potential confounders. Treatment complications were assessed in all analysed patients in the study. This completed study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02270450. FINDINGS: From May 11, 2015, to April 27, 2020, 221 patients were enrolled (143 [65%] were female and 78 [35%] were male). There were 199 evaluable participants: 49 in the randomised pathway (24 surgery and 25 non-surgery) and 150 in the patient choice pathway (58 surgery and 92 non-surgery). No difference was seen between surgery and non-surgery for the primary outcome of good days: mean 42·6 days (SD 32·2) in the randomised surgery group, 43·9 days (29·5) in the randomised non-surgery group, 54·8 days (27·0) in the patient choice surgery group, and 52·7 days (30·7) in the patient choice non-surgery group (adjusted mean difference 2·9 additional good days in surgical versus non-surgical treatment [95% CI -5·5 to 11·3]; p=0·50). During their initial hospital stay, six participants died, five due to cancer progression (four patients from the randomised pathway, two in each treatment group, and one from the patient choice pathway, in the surgery group) and one due to malignant bowel obstruction treatment complications (patient choice pathway, non-surgery). The most common grade 3-4 malignant bowel obstruction treatment complication was anaemia (three [6%] patients in the randomised pathway, all in the surgical group, and five [3%] patients in the patient choice pathway, four in the surgical group and one in the non-surgical group). INTERPRETATION: In our study, whether patients received a surgical or non-surgical treatment approach did not influence good days during the first 91 days after registration. These findings should inform treatment decisions for patients hospitalised with malignant bowel obstruction. FUNDING: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality and the National Cancer Institute. TRANSLATION: For the Spanish translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Risk prediction of hepatitis B or C or HIV among newly diagnosed cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Screening for viral infection in cancer patients is inconsistent. A mechanism to readily identify cancer patients at increased risk of existing or prior viral infection could enhance screening efforts while reducing costs. METHODS: We identified factors associated with increased risk of past or chronic hepatitis virus B, hepatitis virus C, or HIV infection before initiation of systemic cancer therapy. Data were from a multicenter prospective cohort study of 3051 patients with newly diagnosed cancer (SWOG-S1204) enrolled between 2013 and 2017. Patients completed a survey with questions pertaining to personal history and behavioral, socioeconomic, and demographic risk factors for viral hepatitis or HIV. We derived a risk model to predict the presence of viral infection in a random set of 60% of participants using best subset selection. The derived model was validated in the remaining 40% of participants. Logistic regression was used. RESULTS: A model with 7 risk factors was identified, and a risk score with 4 levels was constructed. In the validation cohort, each increase in risk level was associated with a nearly threefold increased risk of viral positivity (odds ratio = 2.85, 95% confidence interval = 2.26 to 3.60, P < .001). Consistent findings were observed for individual viruses. Participants in the highest risk group (with >3 risk factors), comprised of 13.4% of participants, were 18 times more likely to be viral positive compared with participants with no risk factors (odds ratio = 18.18, 95% confidence interval = 8.00 to 41.3, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A risk-stratified screening approach using a limited set of questions could serve as an effective strategy to streamline screening for individuals at increased risk of viral infection.

COVID-19 Vaccine Reactogenicity and Vaccine Attitudes Among Children and Parents/Guardians After Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children or COVID-19 Hospitalization: September 2021-May 2022.

BACKGROUND: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) is a multiorgan hyperinflammatory condition following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Data on COVID-19 vaccine adverse events and vaccine attitudes in children with prior MIS-C are limited. We described characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine adverse events and vaccine attitudes in children with a history of MIS-C or COVID-19 and their parents/guardians. METHODS: We enrolled children previously hospitalized for MIS-C or COVID-19 from 3 academic institutions. We abstracted charts and interviewed children and parents/guardians regarding vaccine adverse events and acceptability. RESULTS: Of 163 vaccine-eligible children enrolled with a history of MIS-C and 70 with history of COVID-19, 51 (31%) and 34 (49%), respectively, received mRNA COVID-19 vaccine a median of 10 (Interquartile Range 6-13) months after hospital discharge. Among 20 children with MIS-C and parents/guardians who provided interviews, local injection site reaction of brief duration (mean 1.8 days) was most commonly reported; no children required medical care within 2 weeks postvaccination. Vaccine survey results of interviewed, vaccinated children and their parents/guardians: of 20 children with MIS-C and 15 children with COVID-19, 17 (85%) and 13 (87%), respectively, listed doctors in the top 3 most trusted sources for vaccine information; 13 (65%) and 9 (60%) discussed vaccination with their doctor. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 vaccination was well tolerated in children with prior MIS-C or COVID-19 participating in our investigation. Parents/guardians regarded their children's doctors as a trusted source of information for COVID-19 vaccines, and most vaccinated children's parents/guardians had discussed COVID-19 vaccination for their child with their doctor.

A Pragmatic Cluster-Randomized Trial of a Standing Order Entry Intervention for Colony-Stimulating Factor Use Among Patients at Intermediate Risk for Febrile Neutropenia.

PURPOSE: Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors (PP-CSFs) are prescribed to reduce febrile neutropenia (FN) but their benefit for intermediate FN risk regimens is uncertain. Within a pragmatic, randomized trial of a standing order entry (SOE) PP-CSF intervention, we conducted a substudy to evaluate the effectiveness of SOE for patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens. METHODS: TrACER was a cluster randomized trial where practices were randomized to usual care or a guideline-based SOE intervention. In the primary study, sites were randomized 3:1 to SOE of automated PP-CSF orders for high FN risk regimens and alerts against PP-CSF use for low-risk regimens versus usual care. A secondary 1:1 randomization assigned 24 intervention sites to either SOE to prescribe or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF for intermediate-risk regimens. Clinicians were allowed to over-ride the SOE. Patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled. Mixed-effect logistic regression models were used to test differences between randomized sites. RESULTS: Between January 2016 and April 2020, 846 eligible patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens were registered to either SOE to prescribe (12 sites: n = 542) or an alert to not prescribe PP-CSF (12 sites: n = 304). Rates of PP-CSF use were higher among sites randomized to SOE (37.1% v 9.9%, odds ratio, 5.91; 95% CI, 1.77 to 19.70; P = .0038). Rates of FN were low and identical between arms (3.7% v 3.7%). CONCLUSION: Although implementation of a SOE intervention for PP-CSF significantly increased PP-CSF use among patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens, FN rates were low and did not differ between arms. Although this guideline-informed SOE influenced prescribing, the results suggest that neither SOE nor PP-CSF provides sufficient benefit to justify their use for all patients receiving first-line intermediate-risk regimens.

Antiviral therapy use and related outcomes in patients with cancer and viral infections: results from SWOG S1204.

PURPOSE: Information is limited about adherence to practice guidelines in patients with hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), or HIV infection receiving anticancer treatment. METHODS: Newly diagnosed adult cancer patients were enrolled in a multicenter, prospective cohort study (SWOG S1204) during 2013-2017 to evaluate the prevalence of HBV, HCV, or HIV in patients initiating anticancer treatment. At 6 months, records of virus-positive patients were reviewed for antiviral therapy use; anticancer treatment dose reduction; and HBV reactivation (elevated viral load). Categorical variables were compared using chi-square or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Of 3055 enrolled patients with viral testing, 230 had chronic or past HBV, HCV, or HIV with 6-month follow-up data (chronic HBV, 15 patients; past HBV, 158; HCV, 49; HIV, 30). Twenty percent (3/15) of chronic HBV and 11% (17/158) of past HBV patients were co-infected with HCV and/or HIV. Rates of antiviral therapy use by 6 months were as follows: chronic HBV, 85% (11/13); past HBV receiving anti-B cell therapy, 60% (3/5); past HBV receiving systemic anticancer therapy without anti-B cell therapy, 8% (8/105); HCV, 6% (2/35); and HIV, 90% (19/21). Among patients with available data, anticancer treatment dose was reduced in 1 of 145 patients with past HBV and 1 of 42 with HCV. HBV reactivation occurred in 1 of 15 patients with chronic HBV; this patient was not receiving antiviral therapy. CONCLUSION: Many patients with cancer and viral infections either do not receive guideline-recommended antiviral treatment or receive antiviral treatment that is not recommended in guidelines. Further education is needed to improve adherence to guidelines.

Effects of a Guideline-Informed Clinical Decision Support System Intervention to Improve Colony-Stimulating Factor Prescribing: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Colony-stimulating factors are prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia. Research suggests that 55% to 95% of colony-stimulating factor prescribing is inconsistent with national guidelines. Objective: To examine whether a guideline-based standing order for primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors improves use and reduces the incidence of febrile neutropenia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cluster randomized clinical trial, the Trial Assessing CSF Prescribing Effectiveness and Risk (TrACER), involved 32 community oncology clinics in the US. Participants were adult patients with breast, colorectal, or non-small cell lung cancer initiating cancer therapy and enrolled between January 2016 and April 2020. Data analysis was performed from July to October 2021. Interventions: Sites were randomized 3:1 to implementation of a guideline-based primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factor standing order system or usual care. Automated orders were added for high-risk regimens, and an alert not to prescribe was included for low-risk regimens. Risk was based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was to find an increase in colony-stimulating factor use among high-risk patients from 40% to 75%, a reduction in use among low-risk patients from 17% to 7%, and a 50% reduction in febrile neutropenia rates in the intervention group. Mixed model logistic regression adjusted for correlation of outcomes within a clinic. Results: A total of 2946 patients (median [IQR] age, 59.0 [50.0-67.0] years; 2233 women [77.0%]; 2292 White [79.1%]) were enrolled; 2287 were randomized to the intervention, and 659 were randomized to usual care. Colony-stimulating factor use for patients receiving high-risk regimens was high and not significantly different between groups (847 of 950 patients [89.2%] in the intervention group vs 296 of 309 patients [95.8%] in the usual care group). Among high-risk patients, febrile neutropenia rates for the intervention (58 of 947 patients [6.1%]) and usual care (13 of 308 patients [4.2%]) groups were not significantly different. The febrile neutropenia rate for patients receiving high-risk regimens not receiving colony-stimulating factors was 14.9% (17 of 114 patients). Among the 585 patients receiving low-risk regimens, colony-stimulating factor use was low and did not differ between groups (29 of 457 patients [6.3%] in the intervention group vs 7 of 128 patients [5.5%] in the usual care group). Febrile neutropenia rates did not differ between usual care (1 of 127 patients [0.8%]) and the intervention (7 of 452 patients [1.5%]) groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial, implementation of a guideline-informed standing order did not affect colony-stimulating factor use or febrile neutropenia rates in high-risk and low-risk patients. Overall, use was generally appropriate for the level of risk. Standing order interventions do not appear to be necessary or effective in the setting of prophylactic colony-stimulating factor prescribing. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02728596.

Changes in Spina Bifida Lesion Level after Folic Acid Fortification in the US.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the severity of cases of spina bifida changed after the institution of mandatory folic acid fortification in the US. STUDY DESIGN: Six active population-based birth defects programs provided data on cases of spina bifida for 1992-1996 (prefortification period) and 1999-2016 (postfortification period). The programs contributed varying years of data. Case information included both a medical record verbatim text description of the spina bifida diagnosis and spina bifida codes (International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification, or a modified birth defects surveillance coding system). Comparing the prefortification and postfortification periods, aORs for case severity (upper-level lesions [cervical, thoracic] vs lower-level lesions [lumbar, sacral]) and prevalence ratios (PRs) were estimated. RESULTS: A total of 2593 cases of spina bifida (out of 7 816 062 live births) met the inclusion criteria, including 573 cases from the prefortification period and 2020 cases from the postfortification period. Case severity decreased by 70% (aOR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.26-0.35) between the fortification periods. The decrease was most pronounced for non-Hispanic White mothers. Overall spina bifida prevalence declined by 23% (PR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.85), with similar reductions seen across the early, mid, and recent postfortification periods. A statistically significant decrease in upper-level lesions occurred in the postfortification period compared with the prefortification period (PR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.22-0.34), whereas the prevalence of lower-level lesions remained relatively similar (PR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: The severity of spina bifida cases decreased after mandatory folic acid fortification in the US. Further examination is warranted to better understand the potential effect of folic acid on spina bifida severity.

Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Adults: Case Finding Through Systematic Review of Electronic Medical Records.

BACKGROUND: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in adults (MIS-A) is a severe condition temporally associated with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we applied the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) case definition to identify diagnosed and undiagnosed MIS-A cases among adults discharged during April 2020-January 2021 from 4 Atlanta, Georgia hospitals affiliated with a single medical center. Non-MIS-A coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) hospitalizations were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification encounter code U07.1. We calculated the ratio of MIS-A to COVID-19 hospitalizations, compared demographic characteristics of the 2 cohorts, and described clinical characteristics of MIS-A patients. RESULTS: We identified 11 MIS-A cases, none of which were diagnosed by the treatment team, and 5755 COVID-19 hospitalizations (ratio 1:523). Compared with patients with COVID-19, patients with MIS-A were more likely to be younger than 50 years (72.7% vs 26.1%, P < .01) and to be non-Hispanic Black (81.8% vs 50.0%, P = .04). Ten patients with MIS-A (90.9%) had at least 1 underlying medical condition. Two MIS-A patients (18.2%) had a previous episode of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19, occurring 37 and 55 days prior to admission. All MIS-A patients developed left ventricular systolic dysfunction. None had documented mucocutaneous involvement. All required intensive care, all received systemic corticosteroids, 8 (72.7%) required mechanical ventilation, 2 (18.2%) required mechanical cardiovascular circulatory support, and none received intravenous immunoglobulin. Two (18.2%) died or were discharged to hospice. CONCLUSIONS: MIS-A is a severe but likely underrecognized complication of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Improved recognition of MIS-A is needed to quantify its burden and identify populations at highest risk.

Successes and challenges of implementing a cancer care delivery intervention in community oncology practices: lessons learned from SWOG S1415CD.

BACKGROUND: Cancer Care Delivery (CCD) research studies often require practice-level interventions that pose challenges in the clinical trial setting. The SWOG Cancer Research Network (SWOG) conducted S1415CD, one of the first pragmatic cluster-randomized CCD trials to be implemented through the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Community Oncology Program (NCORP), to compare outcomes of primary prophylactic colony stimulating factor (PP-CSF) use for an intervention of automated PP-CSF standing orders to usual care. The introduction of new methods for study implementation created challenges and opportunities for learning that can inform the design and approach of future CCD interventions. METHODS: The order entry system intervention was administered at the site level; sites were affiliated NCORP practices that shared the same chemotherapy order system. 32 sites without existing guideline-based PP-CSF standing orders were randomized to the intervention (n = 24) or to usual care (n = 8). Sites assigned to the intervention participated in tailored training, phone calls and onboarding activities administered by research team staff and were provided with additional funding and external IT support to help them make protocol required changes to their order entry systems. RESULTS: The average length of time for intervention sites to complete reconfiguration of their order sets following randomization was 7.2 months. 14 of 24 of intervention sites met their individual patient recruitment target of 99 patients enrolled per site. CONCLUSIONS: In this paper we share seven recommendations based on lessons learned from implementation of the S1415CD intervention at NCORP community oncology practices representing diverse geographies and patient populations across the U. S. It is our hope these recommendations can be used to guide future implementation of CCD interventions in both research and community settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02728596 , registered April 5, 2016.

Change in plasma α-tocopherol associations with attenuated pulmonary function decline and with CYP4F2 missense variation.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin E (vitE) is hypothesized to attenuate age-related decline in pulmonary function. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the association between change in plasma vitE (∆vitE) and pulmonary function decline [forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1)] and examined genetic and nongenetic factors associated with ∆vitE. METHODS: We studied 1144 men randomly assigned to vitE in SELECT (Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial). ∆vitE was the difference between baseline and year 3 vitE concentrations measured with GC-MS. FEV1 was measured longitudinally by spirometry. We genotyped 555 men (vitE-only arm) using the Illumina Expanded Multi-Ethnic Genotyping Array (MEGAex). We used mixed-effects linear regression modeling to examine the ∆vitE-FEV1 association. RESULTS: Higher ∆vitE was associated with lower baseline α-tocopherol (α-TOH), higher baseline γ-tocopherol, higher baseline free cholesterol, European ancestry (as opposed to African) (all P < 0.05), and the minor allele of a missense variant in cytochrome P450 family 4 subfamily F member 2 (CYP4F2) (rs2108622-T; 2.4 µmol/L higher ∆vitE, SE: 0.8 µmol/L; P = 0.0032). Higher ∆vitE was associated with attenuated FEV1 decline, with stronger effects in adherent participants (≥80% of supplements consumed): a statistically significant ∆vitE × time interaction (P = 0.014) indicated that a 1-unit increase in ∆vitE was associated with a 2.2-mL/y attenuation in FEV1 decline (SE: 0.9 mL/y). The effect size for 1 SD higher ∆vitE (+4 µmol/mmol free-cholesterol-adjusted α-TOH) was roughly one-quarter of the effect of 1 y of aging, but in the opposite direction. The ∆vitE-FEV1 association was similar in never smokers (2.4-mL/y attenuated FEV1 decline, SE: 1.0 mL/y; P = 0.017, n = 364), and current smokers (2.8-mL/y, SE: 1.6 mL/y; P = 0.079, n = 214), but there was little to no effect in former smokers (-0.64-mL/y, SE: 0.9 mL/y; P = 0.45, n = 564). CONCLUSIONS: Greater response to vitE supplementation was associated with attenuated FEV1 decline. The response to supplementation differed by rs2108622 such that individuals with the C allele, compared with the T allele, may need a higher dietary intake to reach the same plasma vitE concentration.

Characteristics of Women with Urinary Tract Infection in Pregnancy.

Background: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common bacterial infection in pregnancy. Known risk factors for UTI in pregnancy include diabetes and certain urologic conditions. Other maternal characteristics might also be associated with risk and could provide clues to the etiology of UTI in pregnancy. Our objective was to identify maternal characteristics associated with UTI in pregnancy. Materials and Methods: We used data from pregnant women participating in the National Birth Defects Prevention Study, a population-based study of risk factors for major structural birth defects in 10 U.S. sites, from 1997 to 2011. In cross-sectional analyses, we used multivariable log-binomial regression to estimate prevalence ratios (PRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between self-reported maternal characteristics and UTI in pregnancy. Results: In our sample of 41,869 women, the overall prevalence of reported UTI in pregnancy was 18%, but ranged from 11% to 26% between study sites. In adjusted models, diabetes was moderately associated with higher UTI prevalence (PR 1.39, 95% CI: 1.24-1.57). Higher UTI prevalence was associated even more strongly with low educational attainment (PR 2.06, 95% CI: 1.77-2.40 for some high school vs. graduate school), low household income (PR 1.64, 95% CI: 1.46-1.84 for <$10,000 vs. ≥$50,000), and race/ethnicity (PR 1.45, 95% CI: 1.13-1.80 for American Indian or Alaska Native vs. White women). Conclusions: About one in six women reported UTI in pregnancy but the prevalence varied markedly by geography and maternal characteristics. This variability could provide clues to the causes of UTI in pregnancy.

SWOG S1820: Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms for bowel dysfunction in survivors of Rectal Cancer (The AIMS-RC intervention trial).

OBJECTIVE: To describe the study protocol of SWOG S1820, a trial of the Altering Intake, Managing Symptoms intervention for bowel dysfunction in survivors of Rectal Cancer (AIMS-RC). DESIGN: SWOG S1820 is a multi-site, randomized trial of 94 post-treatment survivors of rectal cancer, comparing the intervention and attention control arms. SETTING: Affiliated institutions of the National Cancer Institute (NCI)-supported National Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) and the National Clinical Trial Network (NCTN). PARTICIPANTS: Survivors of rectal cancer who are between 6 and 24 months after treatment completion. INTERVENTION: AIMS-RC is a 17-week, 10 session telephone coaching program to help survivors of rectal cancer track their symptoms and improve their diets for better health and bowel function. It includes telephone-based coaching, resource manual, and personalized text/email messaging for motivation in between the telephone sessions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bowel function, low anterior resection syndrome score, quality of life (QOL), dietary quality, motivation, self-efficacy, positive/negative affect, feasibility, adherence, retention, acceptability. ANALYSIS: Thirty-seven participants per arm (74 total) provide 80% power to detect this 0.5 standard deviation effect size, based on a two-sample t-test with a 1-sided alpha = 0.1. A total of 94 randomized participants will be accrued to account for 7% ineligibility and 15% attrition at 6 months.