1
|
Ton M, Newcomb PA, Jones S, Malen RC, Heffner JL. Cannabis use after a cancer diagnosis in a population-based sample of cancer survivors. Cancer Causes Control 2024; 35:1033-1042. [PMID: 38519643 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-024-01860-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE This study aimed to characterize the prevalence and correlates of cannabis use and the methods and reasons for use among recently diagnosed cancer survivors in a population sample within Washington state. METHODS We identified individuals diagnosed with invasive cancers in the prior 6 to 17 months from April 2020 to December 2020 using the Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry. Participants (n = 1,515) completed a questionnaire, including demographics, medical history, cannabis use, and other substance use. Cancer characteristics and date of diagnosis were obtained from SEER registry data. We calculated weighted prevalence estimates and logistic regression models to evaluate correlates of cannabis use. RESULTS Overall, 41.3% of survivors reported cannabis use at any time after diagnosis, most commonly via edibles (60.5%) and smoking (43.8%). The most frequently reported reasons for use were sleep (54.5%), mood, stress, anxiety, and depression (44.3%), pain (42.3%), and recreation (42.3%). Cannabis use was associated with younger age, race (White vs. Asian), less education, former or current smoking, consuming more than 2 alcohol-containing drinks per day, having late-stage cancer, and cancer site. CONCLUSION In this first evaluation of cannabis use in a registry-linked, population-based sample of survivors of all cancer types, based in a state where recreational and medical cannabis have been legal for a decade, approximately 2 in 5 survivors reported post-diagnosis use. Given how common cannabis use is among cancer survivors, there is a great need to understand its impact on cancer treatment outcomes and the overall health of cancer survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mimi Ton
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Polly A Newcomb
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - Salene Jones
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
| | - Rachel C Malen
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA
| | - Jaimee L Heffner
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, 1100 Fairview Avenue N, Seattle, WA, 98109, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Adley NC, Brasky TM, Conroy SR, Newton AM, Plascak JJ, Strassels SA, Hays JL, Krok-Schoen JL. Associations of Cancer Patients' Demographic and Clinical Characteristics With Cannabis-Related Interest and Behaviors. J Palliat Med 2024; 27:394-399. [PMID: 38157334 DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2023.0490] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Cannabis interest and use is increasing in the United States, yet research on its use among cancer patients is limited. Methods: Individuals with cancer completed an anonymous cross-sectional questionnaire. Multivariable logistic regressions estimated odds ratios (OR) between patients' demographic and clinical characteristics with cannabis-related interest, current use, and provider recommendation. Results: Participants (n = 943) were, on average, 61.7 years old. Older patients were less likely to use cannabis products (OR = 0.42, confidence interval [95% CI]: 0.26-0.69) and less likely to be interested in cannabis (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44-0.84) than younger patients. Those with higher education were less likely to be using cannabis (OR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.25-0.67) and less likely to have received a provider recommendation of cannabis use than the least educated (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.19-0.76). Cancer spread and type were significant correlates of provider recommendation of cannabis use. Conclusions: Additional research is warranted to better understand cancer patients' motivations for cannabis use and interest.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neema C Adley
- Department of Neuroscience, The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Theodore M Brasky
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Sara R Conroy
- Department of Biomedical Informatics, Center for Biostatistics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Alison M Newton
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Jesse J Plascak
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | | | - John L Hays
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Jessica L Krok-Schoen
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Burnett-Hartman AN, Ton M, He Q, Malen RC, Potter JD, Reedy AM, Phipps AI, Newcomb PA. Dietary Factors Differ Between Young-Onset and Older-Onset Colorectal Cancer Patients. Nutr Cancer 2024; 76:352-355. [PMID: 38347682 PMCID: PMC10983792 DOI: 10.1080/01635581.2024.2316934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/25/2023] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 03/02/2024]
Abstract
We aimed to evaluate differences in dietary factors between young-onset (diagnosed at ages <50) and older-onset colorectal cancer (CRC). CRC patients diagnosed from 1998 to 2018 reported to the Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry were recruited using mail and telephone. Consented patients completed questionnaires assessing demographics, medical history, and CRC risk factors, including dietary factors. We used multi-variable logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing dietary intake in young-onset vs. older-onset CRC. Analyses included 1,087 young- and 2,554 older-onset CRC patients. Compared to older-onset CRC, young-onset CRC patients had lower intake of vegetables (OR for highest intake vs. lowest = 0.59 CI: 0.55, 0.64) and fruit (OR for highest intake vs. lowest = 0.94 CI: 0.88, 0.99) and higher intake of processed meat (OR for highest intake vs. lowest = 1.82 CI: 1.11, 2.99) and spicy food (OR for highest intake vs. lowest = 1.69 CI: 1.09, 2.61). There was no statistically significant difference between young- and older-onset CRC patients for red meat consumption. Dietary patterns differed between young- and older-onset CRC; young-onset CRC patients had lower intake of vegetables and fruit and higher intakes of processed meat and spicy food.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mimi Ton
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Qianchuan He
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | | | - John D. Potter
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Research Centre for Hauora and Health, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand
| | | | - Amanda I. Phipps
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Polly A. Newcomb
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- University of Washington, School of Public Health, Seattle, Washington, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Krok-Schoen JL, Plascak JJ, Newton AM, Strassels SA, Adib A, Adley NC, Hays JL, Wagener TL, Stevens EE, Brasky TM. Current cannabis use and pain management among US cancer patients. Support Care Cancer 2024; 32:111. [PMID: 38236449 PMCID: PMC10796435 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-024-08321-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Accepted: 01/11/2024] [Indexed: 01/19/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND National studies reporting the prevalence of cannabis use have focused on individuals with a history of cancer without distinction by their treatment status, which can impact symptom burden. While pain is a primary motivation to use cannabis in cancer, the magnitude of its association with cannabis use remains understudied. METHODS We examined cannabis use and pain management among 5523 respondents of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System with a cancer history. Survey-weighted prevalence proportions of respondents' cannabis use are reported, stratified on cancer treatment status. Regression models estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of cancer-related pain and cannabis use. RESULTS Cannabis use was slightly more prevalent in those undergoing active treatment relative to those who were not undergoing active treatment (9.3% vs. 6.2%; P=0.05). Those under active treatment were more likely to use cannabis medicinally (71.6% vs. 50.0%; P=0.03). Relative to those without cancer-related pain, persons with pain under medical control (OR 2.1, 95% CI, 1.4-3.2) or uncontrolled pain were twice as likely to use cannabis (OR 2.0, 95% CI, 1.1-3.5). CONCLUSIONS Use of cannabis among cancer patients may be related to their treatment and is positively associated with cancer-related pain. Future research should investigate the associations of cannabis use, symptom burden, and treatment regimens across the treatment spectrum to facilitate interventions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica L Krok-Schoen
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Jesse J Plascak
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Alison M Newton
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine-James Comprehensive Cancer Center, 420 W. 12th Ave., Suite 514B TRF, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | | | - Anita Adib
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Neema C Adley
- Department of Neuroscience, The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - John L Hays
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine-James Comprehensive Cancer Center, 420 W. 12th Ave., Suite 514B TRF, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Theodore L Wagener
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine-James Comprehensive Cancer Center, 420 W. 12th Ave., Suite 514B TRF, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA
| | - Erin E Stevens
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA
| | - Theodore M Brasky
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine-James Comprehensive Cancer Center, 420 W. 12th Ave., Suite 514B TRF, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Amin S, Chae SW, Kawamoto CT, Phillips KT, Pokhrel P. Cannabis use among cancer patients and survivors in the United States: a systematic review. JNCI Cancer Spectr 2024; 8:pkae004. [PMID: 38291891 PMCID: PMC10868394 DOI: 10.1093/jncics/pkae004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Revised: 12/07/2023] [Accepted: 01/17/2024] [Indexed: 02/01/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND How cannabis products are being used by cancer patients and survivors in the United States is poorly understood. This study reviewed observational data to understand the modes, patterns, reasons, discontinuation, and adverse experiences of cannabis use. METHODS PubMed and PsycINFO database searches were conducted between May 2022 and November 2022. Of the 1162 studies identified, 27 studies met the inclusion criteria. The intercoder agreement was strong (0.81). RESULTS The majority (74%) of the studies were cross-sectional in design. Study samples were approximately equal proportions of men and women and majority White participants. The prevalence of cannabis use based on national samples ranged between 4.8% and 22%. The most common modes of cannabis intake were topical application (80%), smoking (73%), vaping (12%), and ingestion of edible products (10%). Younger age, male gender, being a current or former smoker, and higher socioeconomic status were associated with greater likelihood of cannabis use. The main motive for cannabis use was management of symptoms due to cancer or cancer treatment such as pain, nausea, lack of sleep, and anxiety. A majority of the participants across studies reported that cannabis helped reduce these symptoms. Lack of symptom improvement, side effects such as fatigue and paranoia, cost, and social stigma were identified as some of the reasons for discontinuing cannabis use. CONCLUSIONS It appears that cannabis may help cancer patients and survivors manage symptoms. However, more longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether positive experiences of cannabis use outweigh adverse experiences over time in this vulnerable population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samia Amin
- Population Sciences Program, University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center, University of Hawaiʻi at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Si Woo Chae
- Population Sciences Program, University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center, University of Hawaiʻi at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Crissy T Kawamoto
- Population Sciences Program, University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center, University of Hawaiʻi at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Kristina T Phillips
- Center for Integrated Health Care Research, Kaiser Permanente Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA
| | - Pallav Pokhrel
- Population Sciences Program, University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center, University of Hawaiʻi at Manoa, Honolulu, HI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Brasky TM, Newton AM, Conroy S, Adib A, Adley NC, Strassels SA, Hays JL, Cooper ZD, Wagener TL, Stevens E, Plascak JJ, Krok-Schoen JL. Marijuana and Cannabidiol Use Prevalence and Symptom Management Among Patients with Cancer. CANCER RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS 2023; 3:1917-1926. [PMID: 37772996 PMCID: PMC10515742 DOI: 10.1158/2767-9764.crc-23-0233] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2023] [Revised: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 08/30/2023] [Indexed: 09/30/2023]
Abstract
Symptoms such as pain, nausea, and anxiety are common in individuals with cancer. Treatment of these issues is often challenging. Cannabis products may be helpful in reducing the severity of these symptoms. While some studies include data on the prevalence of cannabis use among patients with cancer, detailed data remain limited, and none have reported the prevalence of cannabidiol (CBD) use in this population. Adult patients with cancer attending eight clinics at a large, NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center completed a detailed, cannabis-focused questionnaire between 2021 and 2022. Eligible participants were diagnosed with invasive cancer and treated in the past 12 months. Summary statistics were calculated to describe the sample regarding cannabis use. Approximately 15% (n = 142) of consented patients (n = 934) reported current cannabis use (defined as use within the past 12 months). Among which, 75% reported cannabis use in the past week. Among current cannabis users, 39% (n = 56; 6% overall) used CBD products. Current users reported using cannabis a median of 4.5 (interquartile range: 0.6–7.0) days/week, 2.0 (1.0–3.0) times per use/day, and for 3 years (0.8–30.0). Use patterns varied by route of administration. Patients reported moderate to high relief of symptoms with cannabis use. This study is the most detailed to date in terms of cannabis measurement and provides information about the current state of cannabis use in active cancer. Future studies should include complete assessments of cannabis product use, multiple recruitment sites, and diverse patient populations. SIGNIFICANCE Clinicians should be aware that patients are using cannabis products and perceive symptom relief with its use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore M. Brasky
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Alison M. Newton
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sara Conroy
- Center for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Anita Adib
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Neema C. Adley
- Department of Neuroscience, The Ohio State University College of Arts and Sciences, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - John L. Hays
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Ziva D. Cooper
- UCLA Center for Cannabis and Cannabinoids, Jane and Terry Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles, California
- Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, California
| | - Theodore L. Wagener
- Division of Medical Oncology, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Erin Stevens
- Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine; Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jesse J. Plascak
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jessica L. Krok-Schoen
- School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Pai RK, Banerjee I, Shivji S, Jain S, Hartman D, Buchanan DD, Jenkins MA, Schaeffer DF, Rosty C, Como J, Phipps AI, Newcomb PA, Burnett-Hartman AN, Marchand LL, Samadder NJ, Patel B, Swallow C, Lindor NM, Gallinger SJ, Grant RC, Westerling-Bui T, Conner J, Cyr DP, Kirsch R, Pai RK. Quantitative Pathologic Analysis of Digitized Images of Colorectal Carcinoma Improves Prediction of Recurrence-Free Survival. Gastroenterology 2022; 163:1531-1546.e8. [PMID: 35985511 PMCID: PMC9716432 DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2022.08.025] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 12/02/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS To examine whether quantitative pathologic analysis of digitized hematoxylin and eosin slides of colorectal carcinoma (CRC) correlates with clinicopathologic features, molecular alterations, and prognosis. METHODS A quantitative segmentation algorithm (QuantCRC) was applied to 6468 digitized hematoxylin and eosin slides of CRCs. Fifteen parameters were recorded from each image and tested for associations with clinicopathologic features and molecular alterations. A prognostic model was developed to predict recurrence-free survival using data from the internal cohort (n = 1928) and validated on an internal test (n = 483) and external cohort (n = 938). RESULTS There were significant differences in QuantCRC according to stage, histologic subtype, grade, venous/lymphatic/perineural invasion, tumor budding, CD8 immunohistochemistry, mismatch repair status, KRAS mutation, BRAF mutation, and CpG methylation. A prognostic model incorporating stage, mismatch repair, and QuantCRC resulted in a Harrell's concordance (c)-index of 0.714 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.702-0.724) in the internal test and 0.744 (95% CI, 0.741-0.754) in the external cohort. Removing QuantCRC from the model reduced the c-index to 0.679 (95% CI, 0.673-0.694) in the external cohort. Prognostic risk groups were identified, which provided a hazard ratio of 2.24 (95% CI, 1.33-3.87, P = .004) for low vs high-risk stage III CRCs and 2.36 (95% CI, 1.07-5.20, P = .03) for low vs high-risk stage II CRCs, in the external cohort after adjusting for established risk factors. The predicted median 36-month recurrence rate for high-risk stage III CRCs was 32.7% vs 13.4% for low-risk stage III and 15.8% for high-risk stage II vs 5.4% for low-risk stage II CRCs. CONCLUSIONS QuantCRC provides a powerful adjunct to routine pathologic reporting of CRC. A prognostic model using QuantCRC improves prediction of recurrence-free survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reetesh K. Pai
- Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Imon Banerjee
- Department of Radiology and Machine Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging Center (MI-2), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Sameer Shivji
- Department of Pathology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Suchit Jain
- Department of Radiology and Machine Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging Center (MI-2), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Douglas Hartman
- Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Daniel D. Buchanan
- Colorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Genomic Medicine and Family Cancer Clinic, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Mark A. Jenkins
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia
| | - David F. Schaeffer
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, BC, Canada
| | - Christophe Rosty
- Colorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- Envoi Specialist Pathologists, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
- Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Julia Como
- Colorectal Oncogenomics Group, Department of Clinical Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
- University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research, Victorian Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Amanda I. Phipps
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Polly A. Newcomb
- Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Andrea N. Burnett-Hartman
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
- Institute for Health Research, Kaiser Permanente Colorado, Denver, Colorado, USA
| | - Loic Le Marchand
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Hawaii, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Niloy J. Samadder
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Bhavik Patel
- Department of Radiology and Machine Intelligence in Medicine and Imaging Center (MI-2), Mayo Clinic Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, USA
| | - Carol Swallow
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Noralane M. Lindor
- Department of Health Sciences Research Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| | - Steven J. Gallinger
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgical Oncology Program, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Robert C. Grant
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Vector Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | | | - James Conner
- Department of Pathology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - David P. Cyr
- Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Sinai Health System, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
- Institute of Medical Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Richard Kirsch
- Department of Pathology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
| | - Rish K. Pai
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Brasky TM, Krok-Schoen JL, Conroy S, Newton AM, Strassels SA, Hays JL, Wagener TL. The siren's song of anonymous web-based sampling. Cancer 2022; 128:1871-1872. [PMID: 35194797 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34097] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 12/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Theodore M Brasky
- James Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Medical Oncology, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Jessica L Krok-Schoen
- James Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Health Sciences, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Sara Conroy
- Department of Bioinformatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Alison M Newton
- James Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Medical Oncology, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | | | - John L Hays
- James Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Medical Oncology, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| | - Theodore L Wagener
- James Comprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Division of Medical Oncology, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
- Center for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
| |
Collapse
|