Attitudes toward the American Cancer Society's 2020 cervical cancer screening guidelines: A qualitative study of a national sample of US clinicians.

BACKGROUND: The 2020 American Cancer Society (ACS) guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for cervical cancer screening. These guidelines propose two major changes from current practice: initiating screening at age 25 years and using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, and therefore understanding clinician attitudes is important to facilitate practice change. METHODS: Interviews with a national sample of clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening in a variety of settings explored attitudes toward the two major changes from the 2020 ACS cervical cancer screening guidelines. Clinicians participated in 30- to 60-min interviews exploring their attitudes toward various aspects of cervical cancer screening. Qualitative analysis was performed. RESULTS: Seventy clinicians participated from across the United States. Few respondents were initiating screening at age 25 years, and none were using primary HPV testing. However, over half would be willing to adopt these practices if supported by scientific evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional societies, lack of laboratory availability and insurance coverage, limited autonomy within large health care systems, and concerns related to missed disease. CONCLUSIONS: Few clinicians have adopted screening initiation or primary HPV testing, as recommended by the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to adopting these changes. Implementation may be facilitated via professional organization endorsement, clinician education, and laboratory, health care system, and insurance support. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: In 2020, the American Cancer Society (ACS) released updated guidelines for cervical cancer screening. The main changes to current practices were to initiate screening at age 25 years instead of age 21 years and to screen using primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing rather than cytology alone or in combination with HPV testing. We performed in-depth interviews with 70 obstetrics and gynecology, family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their attitudes toward these guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2020 ACS guidelines, but over half were open to changing practice if the changes were supported by evidence and recommended by professional medical organizations. Barriers to adoption included the lack of endorsement by professional medical organizations, logistical issues, and concerns about missed disease.

Factors Associated With Guideline-concordant and Excessive Cervical Cancer Screening: A Mixed Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: National guidelines recommend cervical cancer screening with Papanicolaou (Pap) testing at 3-year intervals or with human papillomavirus (HPV) testing alone or HPV/Pap cotesting at 5-year intervals for average-risk individuals aged 30-65 years. METHODS: We explored factors associated with clinician-reported guideline-concordant screening, as well as facilitators and barriers to appropriate cervical cancer screening. RESULTS: A national sample of clinicians (N = 1,251) completed surveys; a subset (n = 55) completed interviews. Most (94%) screened average-risk patients aged 30-65 years with cotesting. Nearly all clinicians who were categorized as nonadherent to national guidelines were overscreening (98%). Guideline concordant screening was reported by 47% and 82% of those using cotesting and HPV testing, respectively (5-year intervals), and by 62% of those using Pap testing only (3-year intervals). Concordant screening was reported more often by clinicians who were aged <40 years, non-Hispanic, and practicing in the West or Midwest, and less often by obstetrician-gynecologists and private practice physicians. Concordant screening was facilitated by beliefs that updated guidelines were evidence-based and reduced harms, health care system dissemination of guidelines, and electronic medical record prompts. Barriers to concordant screening included using outdated guidelines, relying on personal judgment, concern about missing cancers, inappropriate patient risk assessment, and lack of support for guideline adoption through health care systems or electronic medical records. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinicians screened with Pap/HPV cotesting and approximately one-half endorsed a 5-year screening interval. Clinician knowledge gaps include understanding the evidence underlying 5-year intervals and appropriate risk assessment to determine which patients should be screened more frequently. Education and tracking systems can promote guideline-concordant screening.

The impact of marital status on tumor aggressiveness, treatment, and screening among black and white men diagnosed with prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To examine the association of marital status with prostate cancer outcomes in a racially-diverse cohort. METHODS: The study population consisted of men (1010 Black; 1070 White) with incident prostate cancer from the baseline North Carolina-Louisiana Prostate Cancer (PCaP) cohort. Marital status at time of diagnosis and screening history were determined by self-report. The binary measure of marital status was defined as married (including living as married) vs. not married (never married, divorced/separated, or widowed). High-aggressive tumors were defined using a composite measure of PSA, Gleason Score, and stage. Definitive treatment was defined as receipt of radical prostatectomy or radiation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of marital status with (1) high-aggressive tumors, (2) receipt of definitive treatment, and (3) screening history among Black and White men with prostate cancer. RESULTS: Black men were less likely to be married than White men (68.1% vs. 83.6%). Not being married (vs. married) was associated with increased odds of high-aggressive tumors in the overall study population (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 1.56; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.20-2.02) and both Black and White men in race-stratified analyses. Unmarried men were less likely to receive definitive treatment in the overall study population (aOR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.54-0.85). In race-stratified analyses, unmarried Black men were less likely to receive definitive treatment. Both unmarried Black and White men were less likely to have a history of prostate cancer screening than married men. CONCLUSION: Lower rates of marriage among Black men might signal decreased support for treatment decision-making, symptom management, and caregiver support which could potentially contribute to prostate cancer disparities.

Examining the perceived impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cervical cancer screening practices among clinicians practicing in Federally Qualified Health Centers: A mixed methods study.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed methods study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings in federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). Methods: Between October 2021 and June 2022, we conducted a national web survey of clinicians (physicians and advanced practice providers) who performed cervical cancer screening in FQHCs in the United States during the post-acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, along with a sub-set of qualitative interviews via video conference, to examine perceived changes in cervical cancer screening practices during the pandemic. Results: A total of 148 clinicians completed surveys; a subset (n=13) completed qualitative interviews. Most (86%) reported reduced cervical cancer screening early in the pandemic, and 28% reported continued reduction in services at the time of survey completion (October 2021- July 2022). Nearly half (45%) reported staff shortages impacting their ability to screen or track patients. Compared to clinicians in Obstetrics/Gynecology/Women's health, those in family medicine and other specialties more often reported reduced screening compared to pre-pandemic. Most (92%) felt that screening using HPV self-sampling would be very or somewhat helpful to address screening backlogs. Qualitative interviews highlighted the impacts of staff shortages and strategies for improvement. Conclusions: Findings highlight that in late 2021 and early 2022, many clinicians in FQHCs reported reduced cervical cancer screening and of pandemic-related staffing shortages impacting screening and follow-up. If not addressed, reduced screenings among underserved populations could worsen cervical cancer disparities in the future. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

Examining the association of clinician characteristics with perceived changes in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy practice during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed methods assessment.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic led to reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy. Therefore, in this mixed method study we explored perceived pandemic-related practice changes to cervical cancer screenings and colposcopies. Methods: In 2021, a national sample of 1251 clinicians completed surveys, including 675 clinicians who performed colposcopy; a subset (n=55) of clinicians completed qualitative interviews. Results: Nearly half of all clinicians reported they were currently performing fewer cervical cancer screenings (47%) and colposcopies (44% of those who perform the procedure) than before the pandemic. About one-fifth (18.6%) of colposcopists reported performing fewer LEEPs than prior to the pandemic. Binomial regression analyses indicated that older, as well as internal medicine and family medicine clinicians (compared to OB-GYNs), and those practicing in community health centers (compared to private practice) had higher odds of reporting reduced screening. Among colposcopists, internal medicine physicians and those practicing in community health centers had higher odds of reporting reduced colposcopies. Qualitative interviews highlighted pandemic-related care disruptions and lack of tracking systems to identify overdue screenings. Conclusions: Reductions in cervical cancer screening and colposcopy among nearly half of clinicians more than 1 year into the pandemic raise concerns that inadequate screening and follow-up will lead to future increases in preventable cancers. Funding: This study was funded by the American Cancer Society, who had no role in the study's design, conduct, or reporting.

A cross-sectional survey examining clinician characteristics, practices, and attitudes associated with adoption of the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology (ASCCP) risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for the management of abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. These guidelines benefit patients by concentrating testing and treatment in those at highest cervical cancer risk. Adoption of guidelines often occurs slowly, with few studies examining the factors associated with guideline-adherent management of abnormal results. METHODS: To elucidate the factors associated with the use of the 2019 ASCCP guidelines among clinicians who perform cervical cancer screening, physicians and advanced practice professionals who perform cervical cancer screening were cross-sectionally surveyed. Clinicians responded to screening vignettes with differing recommendations for management between the 2019 and prior management guidelines. Screening vignette 1 involved reduction of invasive testing on a low-risk patient; screening vignette 2 involved increased surveillance testing on a high-risk patient. Binomial logistic regression models determined the factors associated with the use of the 2019 guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 1251 clinicians participated from across the United States. For screening vignettes 1 and 2, guideline-adherent responses were given by 28% and 36% of participants, respectively. Management recommendations differed by specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by obstetrics and gynecology physicians (vignette 1) and inappropriate discontinuation of screening by family and internal medicine physicians (vignette 2). Regardless of their chosen response, over half erroneously believed they were guideline adherent. CONCLUSIONS: Many clinicians who believe they are following appropriate guidelines may not realize their management strategy is inconsistent with the 2019 guidelines. Education initiatives tailored to clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: The 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk-based management consensus guidelines are the most recent national guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening test management. We surveyed over 1200 obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), family medicine, and internal medicine physicians and advanced practice providers about their screening and abnormal results follow-up practices in relation to guidelines. Few clinicians are following the 2019 guidelines. Management recommendations differed by clinician specialty and were incorrect in different situations: there was inappropriate invasive testing by OB/GYN physicians and inappropriate screening discontinuation by family and internal medicine physicians. Education tailored by clinician specialty could address the understanding of current guidelines, encourage the use of updated guidelines, maximize patient benefits, and minimize harms.

Cancer-related information behavior among Black and Hispanic populations in an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center catchment.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to better understand health behaviors, particularly health information seeking, and how this impacts cancer care within underserved minority populations in a specific catchment area in Florida. METHODS: We conducted an analysis of survey data from a 2019 community health survey conducted by the Moffit Cancer Center (MCC). We utilized the Comprehensive Model of Information Seeking (CMIS) as a framework and performed structural equation modeling (SEM) and related statistical analyses. RESULTS: Our findings confirm that characteristics and demographics present a positive relationship to Online Health Information Seeking (OHIS). We also found that Utility had a negative significant relationship to OHIS. CONCLUSIONS: We concluded that the CMIS is a useful framework for studying cancer-related information seeking, and that when properly executed in the confines of a study, can lend itself to in-depth statistical analyses as found in SEM. IMPLICATIONS: The SEM revealed the CMIS to be promising with results in our analysis worthy of further investigation of cancer care and healthcare information access considering undeserved and minority populations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Models such as the CMIS can be useful for understanding information seeking behaviors and to design information and communication interventions to improve access and health outcomes.

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.

The Role of BMI in Allostatic Load and Risk of Cancer Death.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity and proinflammatory conditions are associated with increased risks of cancer. The associations of baseline allostatic load with cancer mortality and whether this association is modified by body mass index (BMI) were examined. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed in March-September 2022 using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey years 1988 through 2010 linked with the National Death Index through December 31, 2019. Fine and Gray Cox proportional hazard models were stratified by BMI status to estimate subdistribution hazard ratios of cancer death between high and low allostatic load status (adjusted for age, sociodemographics, and health factors). RESULTS: In fully adjusted models, high allostatic load was associated with a 23% increased risk of cancer death (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio=1.23; 95% CI=1.06, 1.43) among all participants, a 3% increased risk of cancer death (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio=1.03; 95% CI=0.78, 1.34) among underweight/healthy weight adults, a 31% increased risk of cancer death (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio=1.31; 95% CI=1.02, 1.67) among overweight adults, and a 39% increased risk of death (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio=1.39; 95% CI=1.04, 1.88) among obese adults, when compared to those with low allostatic load. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of cancer death is highest among those with high allostatic load and obese BMI, but this effect was attenuated among those with high allostatic load and underweight/healthy or overweight BMI.

HPV vaccine recommendations by age: A survey of providers in federally qualified health centers.

Clinician recommendation remains a critical factor in improving HPV vaccine uptake. Clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers were surveyed between October 2021 and July 2022. Clinicians were asked how they recommended HPV vaccination for patients aged 9-10, 11-12, 13-18, 19-26, and 27-45 y (strongly recommend, offer but do not recommend strongly, discuss only if the patient initiates the conversation, or recommend against). Descriptive statistics were assessed, and exact binomial logistic regression analyses were utilized to examine factors associated with HPV vaccination recommendation in 9-10-y-old patients. Respondents (n = 148) were primarily female (85%), between the ages of 30-39 (38%), white, non-Hispanic (62%), advanced practice providers (55%), family medicine specialty (70%), and practicing in the Northeast (63%). Strong recommendations for HPV vaccination varied by age: 65% strongly recommended for ages 9-10, 94% for ages 11-12, 96% for ages 13-18, 82% for age 19-26, and 26% for ages 27-45 y. Compared to Women's Health/OBGYN specialty, family medicine clinicians were less likely to recommend HPV vaccination at ages 9-10 (p = .03). Approximately two-thirds of clinicians practicing in federally qualified health centers or safety net settings strongly recommend HPV vaccine series initiation at ages 9-10. Additional research is needed to improve recommendations in younger age groups.

Engaging Physicians and Systems to Improve Hepatitis C Virus Testing in Baby Boomers.

Approximately three million people in the United States have been exposed to the hepatitis C virus (HCV), with two-thirds of these having chronic HCV infection. Baby boomers (those born 1945-1965) have nearly five times the prevalence of HCV infection compared with other age groups. Despite clinical practice guidelines that recommend HCV testing in baby boomers, the testing rates remain low. We developed and tested a multilevel intervention to increase orders for HCV testing that included integrated clinical decision support within the electronic health record (EHR) and a physician education session to improve HCV physician knowledge in one Florida academic health system. In the year prior to the intervention, test order rates for encounters with baby boomers was 11.9%. During the intervention period (August 2019-July 2020) for providers that viewed a best practice alert (BPA), the ordering increased to 59.2% in Family Medicine and 64.6% in Internal Medicine. The brief physician education intervention improved total HCV knowledge and increased self-efficacy in knowledge of HCV risk factors. These findings suggest that interventions at the system and physician levels hold promise for increasing HCV testing rates. Future studies are needed to evaluate this intervention in additional clinical settings and to test the benefit of adding additional intervention components that are directed at patients.

Development of a Patient Activation Toolkit for Hepatitis C Virus Testing.

We evaluated the acceptability of a patient activation toolkit for hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing amidst universal adult guidelines. We developed a patient-facing toolkit that included a letter to the patient from their healthcare provider, HCV factsheet, and question prompt list, which contained questions for their provider about HCV infection and testing. We conducted qualitative interviews with patients ages 18-78 (n = 17), using a semi-structured interview guide based on learner verification. We assessed attraction, comprehension, cultural-linguistic acceptability, self-efficacy, and persuasiveness of toolkit materials using direct content analysis. Participants reported materials were attractive, offering suggestions to improve readability. They reported some understanding of materials but requested use of less medical jargon, particularly for the factsheet. Participants discussed cultural acceptability and suggested ways to improve language inclusiveness and comfort with content, given stigma surrounding HCV risk factors. Participants reported that including a letter, factsheet, and QPL improved the persuasiveness of materials, and they conveyed their motivation to be tested for HCV. Results indicate preliminary acceptability for use of the patient activation toolkit, which will be refined based on participants' recommendations. Overall, this patient activation toolkit holds promise for increasing HCV testing rates.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Rural-Urban Trends in 5-Year Survival of Patients With Lung, Prostate, Breast, and Colorectal Cancers: 1975-2011 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER).

Importance: Considering reported rural-urban cancer incidence and mortality trends, rural-urban cancer survival trends are important for providing a comprehensive description of cancer burden. Furthermore, little is known about rural-urban differences in survival trends by racial and ethnic groups. Objective: To examine national rural-urban trends in 5-year cancer-specific survival probabilities for lung, prostate, breast, and colorectal cancers in a diverse sample of racial and ethnic groups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used an epidemiologic assessment with 1975 to 2016 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data to analyze patients diagnosed no later than 2011. Patients were classified as living in rural and urban counties based on the 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes. Main Outcomes and Measures: The 5-year cancer-specific survival probability of urban and rural patients for each cancer type was estimated by fitting Cox proportional hazard regression models accounting for race, ethnicity, tumor characteristics, and other sociodemographic characteristics. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate the mean estimated probability of survival for each stratum. Joinpoint regression analysis estimated periods of significant change in survival. Results: In this study, data from 3 659 417 patients with cancer (median [IQR] age, 67 [58-76]; 1 918 609 [52.4%] male; 237 815 [6.5%] Hispanic patients; 396 790 [10.8%] Black patients; 2 825 037 [77.2%] White patients) were analyzed, including 888 338 patients with lung cancer (24.3%), 750 704 patients with colorectal cancer (20.5%), 987 826 patients with breast cancer (27.0%) breast, and 1 023 549 patients with prostate cancer (28.0%). There were 430 353 rural patients (11.8%). Overall, there was an equal representation of rural and urban men. Rural patients were likely to be non-Hispanic White individuals, have more cases of distant tumors, and be older. Rural and non-Hispanic Black patients for all cancer types often had shorter survival. From 1975 to 2016, the 5-year lung cancer survival rate was shorter for non-Hispanic Black rural patients in 1975 at 48%, while increasing to 57% for both non-Hispanic Black urban and rural patients in 2011, but still the shortest among all cancer types. In 1975, the longest survival rate was observed in urban Asian and Pacific Islander patients with breast cancer at 86%, and in 2011, the longest survival rate was observed in urban non-Hispanic White patients with XX cancer at 92%. Conclusions and Relevance: Even after accounting for sociodemographic and tumor characteristics, these findings suggest that non-Hispanic Black patients with cancer are particularly vulnerable to cancer burden, and resources are urgently needed to reverse decades-old survival trends.

An informed approach to the development of primary care pediatric firearm safety messages.

BACKGROUND: Firearm ownership is prevalent in the US and many children spend time in areas where firearms are not stored safely. The AAP recommends firearm safety counseling at pediatric well-visits. METHODS: We developed and tested six contextual messages to promote safe firearm storage based on: absence of harm, collective appeal to understanding child behavior, pediatrician's authority, evidence-based, fear appeal, and general safety considerations. One hundred four parents who keep firearms at home were recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk Prime and viewed video messages and reported behavioral intentions and emotional reactions following each message. RESULTS: All six contextual messages were perceived as important and believable and increased parents' intentions to follow safety advice provided, but also elicited negative emotions. The authority message elicited more negative emotions and resulted in lower intentions to follow safe storage advice. CONCLUSIONS: Including firearm messages with other child safety advice merits further evaluation. Authority messages should be avoided.

Development and pilot testing of a training for bilingual community education professionals about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer among Latinas: ÁRBOLES Familiares.

Cancer health disparities remain a significant problem in the USA, compounded by lack of access to care, language barriers and systemic biases in health care. These disparities are particularly evident in areas such as genetics/genomics. For example, Latinas at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have extremely low rates of genetic counseling/testing. Long-standing barriers and inequities in access to services such as genetic counseling and testing require innovative solutions. One solution can involve training community outreach and education professionals (CORE-Ps) to bridge the gap between underserved communities and genetic specialists. We sought to develop and pilot test a training program for English-Spanish bilingual CORE-Ps to reduce disparities in access to and uptake of genetic services among Latino populations. Guided by Adult Learning Theory and with input from multiple stakeholders, we developed ÁRBOLES Familiares (Family Trees), an in-person and online training program for bilingual CORE-Ps to facilitate identification, referral, and navigation of Latinas to genetic counseling/testing. We conducted a pilot test of 24 CORE-Ps recruited from across the United States and assessed knowledge, genetic literacy, and self-efficacy at baseline and follow-up. At follow-up, participants in the pilot with complete baseline and follow-up data (N = 15) demonstrated significant improvements in HBOC knowledge, genetic literacy, self-efficacy and reports of fewer barriers to identify/navigate Latinas (ps < .05). Qualitative assessment identified ways to improve the training curriculum. Pilot results suggest ÁRBOLES is a promising approach for training CORE-Ps to identify and refer high-risk Latinas to genetic services. Next steps involve further refinement of ÁRBOLES, development of an online toolkit, and adaptation for virtual delivery.

Latinas at high risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer (HBOC) have low rates of genetic counseling and testing. Latinas may not have ready access to services like genetic counseling and testing, which need special solutions. One solution can involve training community health workers to bridge the gap between Latinas and genetic specialists. We developed an online and in person training program (ÁRBOLES Familiares or Family Trees) for English-Spanish bilingual community health workers that teaches them how to help Latinas get access to genetic services. We tested this program with a small group of community health workers. After the program, their HBOC knowledge, genetic literacy, and confidence to help Latinas get access to genetic services had improved. Trainees also made suggestions to improve the program, which will be used to help future trainees expand their knowledge and skills to work with Latinas at risk of HBOC.

Patterns of HIV Self-Disclosure in the Oncology Setting.

Higher rates of cancer treatment toxicity and uniquely poor outcomes following a cancer diagnosis have been reported for persons living with HIV (PLWH). This highlights the importance of active HIV status ascertainment in the oncology setting. Self-disclosure of HIV via electronic questionnaire at patient intake is a low-cost option that has not been thoroughly evaluated. We examined 10 years (2009-2019) of patient intake questionnaire data at Moffitt Cancer Center. Self-disclosure of an HIV diagnosis was not uniform, with 36.1% (n = 299, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 32.8% to 39.4%) of 828 patients disclosing. Identification of HIV through this method was highest for anal cancer patients (66.7%, 95% CI = 57.8% to 74.7%). Self-disclosure among patients with hematopoietic malignancies, the most common diagnosis among PLWH at our institution, was lower (19.4%, 95% CI = 14.6% to 25.0%). Patient characteristics associated with HIV self-disclosure included cancer site, natal gender, and race and ethnicity. Findings highlight gaps to motivate future efforts to increase HIV ascertainment prior to initiating cancer care.

Breast Cancer Mortality Hot Spots Among Black Women With de Novo Metastatic Breast Cancer.

Background: Black women living in southern states have the highest breast cancer mortality rate in the United States. The prognosis of de novo metastatic breast cancer is poor. Given these mortality rates, we are the first to link nationally representative data on breast cancer mortality hot spots (counties with high breast cancer mortality rates) with cancer mortality data in the United States and investigate the association of geographic breast cancer mortality hot spots with de novo metastatic breast cancer mortality among Black women. Methods: We identified 7292 Black women diagnosed with de novo metastatic breast cancer in Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER). The county-level characteristics were obtained from 2014 County Health Rankings and linked to SEER. We used Cox proportional hazards models to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mortality between hot spot and non-hot spot counties. Results: Among 7292 patients, 393 (5.4%) resided in breast cancer mortality hot spots. Women residing in hot spots had similar risks of breast cancer-specific mortality (aHR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.15) and all-cause mortality (aHR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.11) as women in non-hot spots after adjusting for individual and tumor-level factors and treatments. Additional adjustment for county-level characteristics did not impact mortality. Conclusion: Living in a breast cancer mortality hot spot was not associated with de novo metastatic breast cancer mortality among Black women. Future research should begin to examine variation in both individual and population-level determinants, as well as in molecular and genetic determinants that underlie the aggressive nature of de novo metastatic breast cancer.

Cervical cancer screening in the United States: Challenges and potential solutions for underscreened groups.

Cervical cancer screening rates in the United States are generally high, yet certain groups demonstrate disparities in screening and surveillance. Individuals at greatest risk for cervical cancer are often from marginalized or underserved groups who do not participate in regular screening for a variety of reasons. Using the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) Trans-Organ Conceptual Model, including concepts of individual-, provider-, facility-, system-, or policy-level factors, we provide a commentary to highlight reasons for low screening participation among subgroups in the U.S. These include racial and ethnic minorities, rural residents, sexual and gender minorities, those with limited English proficiency, those with particular religious beliefs, and various health conditions. We describe barriers and offer potential solutions for each group. In addition, we discuss cross-cutting barriers to screening including difficulty interacting with the healthcare system (limited knowledge and health literacy, lack of provider recommendation/contact), financial (cost, lack of insurance), and logistical barriers (e.g., lack of usual source of care, competing demands, scheduling issues). Solutions to address these barriers are needed to improve screening rates across all underscreened groups. Changes at state and national policy levels are needed to address health insurance coverage. Mobile screening, ensuring that interpreters are available for all visits, and targeted in reach at non-gynecological visits can further overcome barriers. Employing community outreach workers can increase community demand for screening, and patient navigators can improve adherence to both screening and follow-up diagnostic evaluation. HPV self-sampling can address multiple barriers to cervical cancer screening.

HCV testing: Order and completion rates among baby boomers obtaining care from seven health systems in Florida, 2015-2017.

Many U.S. residents infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) are baby boomers (born 1945-1965), who remain undiagnosed. Past CDC and USPSTF guidelines recommended one-time HCV testing for all baby boomers, with newer guidelines recommending universal screening for all adults. This retrospective cohort study examined electronic medical records for patient visits from 2015 to 2017 within the OneFlorida Data Trust and University of South Florida Health system. We assessed percentages of HCV tests ordered and completed across four age groups (those born before 1945, 1945-1965, 1966-1985, and after 1985). In 2019, we used logistic regression to examine factors associated with HCV test ordering and completion among baby boomers, including age, race, sex, number of primary care visits, HIV status, hepatitis diagnosis, and liver cancer history. All age groups had low rates of HCV test orders. 4.4% of baby boomers had a test ordered in 2015, and 6.7% in 2016. Of those, 94.5% and 89.7% completed testing, respectively. All other races/ethnicities had lower likelihood of testing completion than Whites (Blacks (aOR 0.82, 95%, CI 0.75-0.91); Asians (0.69, 0.52-0.92); Hispanics (0.29, 0.26-0.32)), although test orders were higher for Asians (1.48, 1.37-1.61) and Blacks (1.78, 1.73-1.82). Tests ordered (11.42, 10.94-11.92) and completed (2.25, 1.94-2.60) were more likely among those with hepatitis history. Test orders were more likely for HIV-positive patients (3.68, 3.45-3.93), but completion was less likely (0.67, 0.57-0.78). Interventions are needed to increase testing rates so that HCV infections are treated early, mitigating HCV-related morbidity and mortality, especially related to liver cancer.

"I think that a brief conversation from their provider can go a very long way": Patient and provider perspectives on barriers and facilitators of genetic testing after ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Identify predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting genetic counseling/testing among ovarian cancer patients guided by Green and Kreuter's PRECEDE-PROCEED model. METHODS: Gynecologic oncology providers (N = 4), genetic counselors (N = 4), and ovarian cancer patients (N = 9) completed semi-structured qualitative interviews exploring participants' knowledge of and experiences with genetic counseling/testing. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using inductive content analysis by two independent raters. RESULTS: Thematic analysis identified predisposing, enabling, and reinforcing factors impacting referral for and uptake of genetic counseling/testing. Predisposing factors included participant's knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes related to genetic counseling/testing. Both patients and providers also cited that insurance coverage and out-of-pocket cost are major concerns for ovarian cancer patients considering genetic testing. Finally, both patients and providers emphasized that genetic counseling/testing would provide additional information to an ovarian cancer patient. While providers emphasized that genetic testing results were useful for informing a patient's personal treatment plan, patients emphasized that this knowledge would be beneficial for their family members. CONCLUSION: Barriers to genetic testing for ovarian cancer patients exist at multiple levels, including the patient (e.g., knowledge, attitudes), the provider (e.g., workload, availability of services), the institution (e.g., difficulty with referrals/scheduling), and the healthcare system (e.g., insurance/cost). Interventions aiming to increase genetic testing among ovarian cancer patients will likely need to target multiple levels of influence. Future quantitative studies are needed to replicate these results. This line of work will inform specific multilevel intervention strategies that are adaptable to different practice settings, ultimately improving guideline concordant care.