A Coala-T-Cannabis Survey Study of breast cancer patients' use of cannabis before, during, and after treatment.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to characterize cannabis use among patients with breast cancer, including their reasons for and timing of use, their sources of cannabis information and products, their satisfaction with the information found, their perceptions of its safety, and their dialogue about cannabis with their physicians. METHODS: United States-based members of the Breastcancer.org and Healthline.com communities with a self-reported diagnosis of breast cancer within 5 years (age ≥ 18 years) were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. After informed consent was obtained, nonidentifiable data were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Of all participants (n = 612), 42% (n = 257) reported using cannabis for relief of symptoms, which included pain (78%), insomnia (70%), anxiety (57%), stress (51%), and nausea/vomiting (46%). Furthermore, 49% of cannabis users believed that medical cannabis could be used to treat cancer itself. Of those taking cannabis, 79% had used it during treatment, which included systemic therapies, radiation, and surgery. At the same time, few (39%) had discussed it with any of their physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of survey participants (42%) used cannabis to address symptoms; approximately half of these participants believed that cannabis could treat cancer itself. Most participants used cannabis during active cancer treatment despite the potential for an adverse event during this vulnerable time. Furthermore, most participants believed that cannabis was safe and were unaware that product quality varied widely and depended on the source. This study reviews the research on medicinal cannabis in the setting of these findings to help physicians to recognize its risks and benefits for patients with cancer. LAY SUMMARY: Almost half of patients with breast cancer use cannabis, most commonly during active treatment to manage common symptoms and side effects: pain, anxiety, insomnia, and nausea. However, most patients do not discuss cannabis use with their physicians. Instead, the internet and family/friends are the most common sources of cannabis information. Furthermore, most participants believe that cannabis products are safe and are unaware that the safety of many products is untested.

COVID-19 Pandemic: Changes in Care for a Community Academic Breast Center and Patient Perception of Those Changes.

BACKGROUND: Philadelphia and its suburbs were an epicenter for the initial COVID-19 outbreak. Accordingly, alterations were made in breast cancer care at a community hospital. METHODS: The authors developed a prospective database of all the patients with invasive or in situ breast cancer between March 1 and June 15 at their breast center. Any change in a breast cancer plan due to the pandemic was documented, and the patients were grouped into two cohorts according to whether a change was made (CTX) or no change was made (NC) in their care. The patients were asked a series of questions about their care, including those in the Generalized Anxiety Disorder two-item questionnaire (GAD-2), via telephone. RESULTS: The study enrolled 73 patients: 41 NC patients (56%) and 32 CTX patients (44%). The two cohorts did not differ in terms of age, race, or stage. Changes included delay in therapy (15.1%) and use of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET, 28.8%). The median time to surgery was 24 days (interequartile range [IQR], 16-45 days) for the NC patients and 82 day s (IQR, 52-98 days) for the CTX patients (p ≤ 0.001). The median duration of NET was 78 days. The GAD-2 showed anxiety positivity to be 29.6% for the CTX patients and 32.4% for the NC patients (p = 1.00). More than half (55.6%) of the CTX patients believed COVID-19 affected their treatment outlook compared with 25.7% of the NC patients (p = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: A prospective database captured changes in breast cancer care at a community academic breast center during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. 44% of patients experienced a change in breast cancer care due to COVID-19. The same level of anxiety and depression was seen in both change in therapy (CTX) and no change (NC). 55.6% of CTX cohort believed COVID-19 affected their treatment outlook.

Metabolic Syndrome: does this influence breast cancer outcomes in the triple-negative population?

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic syndrome (MS) is defined by having at least 3 of 4 components: obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension (HTN), and diabetes. Prior studies analyzed the individual components of MS for all breast cancers which are predominantly hormone positive. Our study is the first to evaluate MS in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). METHODS: A retrospective review of TNBC from 2007 to 2013 identified 177 patients with complete information for statistical analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to test the association between MS, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: 48 (27%) patients had MS. After controlling for age, race, pathologic stage, surgery type, and additional comorbidities outside of MS, MS was significantly associated with poorer DFS (adjusted HR: 2.24, p = 0.030), but not associated with OS (adjusted HR: 1.92, p = 0.103). HTN was significantly associated with poorer DFS (adjusted HR: 3.63, p = 0.006) and OS (adjusted HR: 3.45, p = 0.035) in the univariable and multivariable analyses. Diabetes was not associated with worse OS or DFS. The 5-year age-adjusted OS rates for 60-year-old patients with and without diabetes were 85.8% and 87.3%, respectively. The age-adjusted 5-year OS rate for 60-year old patients was higher in patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 30 (90.2%) versus BMIs of 25-29.9 (88.2%) or < 25 (83.5%). CONCLUSION: In the TNBC population, MS was significantly associated with poorer DFS, but not associated with OS. HTN was the only component of MS that was significantly associated with both DFS and OS. Obesity has a potential small protective benefit in the TNBC population.

In-season effect of flue gas desulfurization gypsum on soil physical properties.

There is renewed interest in the application of gypsum to agricultural lands, particularly of gypsum produced during flue gas desulfurization (FGD) at coal-burning power plants. We studied the effects of land application of FGD gypsum to corn ( L.) in watersheds draining to the Great Lakes. The FGD gypsum was surface applied at 11 sites at rates of 0, 1120, 2240, and 4480 kg ha after planting to 3-m by 7.6-m field plots. Approximately 12 wk after application, penetration resistance and hydraulic conductivity were measured in situ, and samples were collected for determination of bulk density and aggregate stability. No treatment effect was detected for penetration resistance or hydraulic conductivity. A positive treatment effect was seen for bulk density at only 2 of 10 sites tested. Aggregate stability reacted similarly across all sites and was decreased with the highest application of FGD gypsum, whereas the lower rates were not different from the control. Overall, there were few beneficial effects of the FGD gypsum to soil physical properties in the year of application.