Stigma, social support, and spirituality: associations with symptoms among Black, Latina, and Chinese American cervical cancer survivors

PURPOSE

Few studies have examined experiences of stigma and factors associated with symptoms among cervical cancer survivors from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. We investigated survivorship experiences and patient-reported outcomes in the SPADE symptom cluster (sleep disturbance, pain interference, anxiety, depression, and energy/fatigue) among Black, Latina, and Chinese American women diagnosed with cervical cancer.

METHODS

In two phases of research with cervical cancer survivors, we collected qualitative data through individual interviews (N=12; recruited through community referrals) and quantitative data from an observational cohort study (N=91; recruited through 4 national cancer registries). We coded interview transcripts to describe the survivors' experiences. We then evaluated associations between social support, spirituality, and SPADE symptom cluster domains using linear regression models.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis yielded four themes: perceptions of stigma, empowerment, physical and psychological effects, and social support. These concepts revolved around internal and external stigmas, emotional responses, strengthened faith, and different social support types. Quantitative analyses indicated that greater spirituality was associated with lower symptom burden on all five SPADE domains (p<0.01). We observed nuanced associations between specific types of social support and SPADE domains.

CONCLUSIONS

The survivorship experiences of Black, Latina, and Chinese American women with cervical cancer are negatively influenced by perceptions of stigma. Higher scores on spirituality and varied types of social support were significantly associated with fewer symptoms in the SPADE symptom cluster.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

Results suggest targets for future interventions to reduce symptom burden among women diagnosed with cervical cancer by leveraging spirituality and social support.

A multilevel intervention in pediatric primary care for youth tobacco control: Outcomes of implementing an Ask, Advise, and Connect model

Multilevel interventions in healthcare settings (e.g. Ask, Advise, and Connect; AAC) can reduce tobacco product use among adult patients: their effectiveness in pediatric practice is largely unknown. We implemented an AAC model in pediatric primary care to deter children's tobacco use, and evaluated its effectiveness in a single-arm trial. At wellness visits, young patients (ages 12-17) completed a tablet-based assessment (Ask) of lifetime and current tobacco use. These data were made available within the electronic health record to pediatric primary care providers for preventive counseling (Advise). Providers then referred patients to an e-health evidence-based tobacco control intervention (Connect). Tobacco control outcomes were examined in the clinic population (N = 2219) and in a sample of patients (N = 388, 62% female, 39% non-White, M age = 15) over time, along with intervention engagement. Population use of tobacco products decreased following introduction of AAC (more than 2-fold). At the patient level, most children (80.9%) engaged with the intervention: those who were Black or African American, who never used tobacco products/were not susceptible to use, and who used fewer non-cigarette tobacco products were more likely to engage, but only after multiple prompts versus a single prompt. Engagement was positively associated with lowering children's susceptibility to using tobacco at follow-up. A pediatric AAC model holds promise in deterring youth tobacco use, including among historically marginalized populations who may require additional support.

Integrating Tobacco Use Assessment and Treatment in the Oncology Setting: Quality Improvement Results from the Georgetown Lombardi Smoking Treatment and Recovery Program

As part of the NCI’s Cancer Center Cessation (C3i) initiative, we initiated, expanded, and maintained an evidence-based tobacco treatment program at the Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center. We present a quality improvement (QI) assessment of the implementation process and patient-level outcomes. At two hematology/oncology outpatient clinical sites, five oncology-based teams (clinical administrators, clinical staff, pharmacy, information technology, and tobacco treatment staff) developed implementation strategies for opt-out patient assessment and enrollment, centralized tobacco treatment, audit, feedback, and staff training. Among eligible patients (tobacco use in ≤30 days), we assessed demographic, clinical, and tobacco-related characteristics to examine predictors of enrollment (baseline completed), treatment engagement (≥one sessions completed), and self-reported 7-day abstinence (6 months post-enrollment). Across both sites, medical assistants screened 19,344 (82.4%) patients for tobacco use, which identified 1345 (7.0%) current tobacco users, in addition to 213 clinician referrals. Of the 687/1256 (54.7%) eligible patients reached, 301 (43.8%) enrolled, and 199 (29.0%) engaged in treatment, of whom 74.5% were African American and 68% were female. At the larger site, significant multivariate predictors of enrollment included African American race (vs. white/other) and clinician referral (vs. MA assessment). Treatment engagement was predicted by greater nicotine dependence, and abstinence (27.4%) was predicted by greater treatment engagement. In summary, the systematic utilization of multiple oncology-based teams and implementation strategies resulted in the development and maintenance of a high-quality, population-based approach to tobacco treatment. Importantly, these strategies addressed inequities in tobacco treatment, as the program reached and engaged a majority-African-American patient population. Finally, the opt-out patient assessment strategy has been implemented in multiple oncology settings at MedStar Health through the Commission on Cancer’s Just Ask program.

A Randomized Trial of Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Treatment in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting

BACKGROUND

Lung cancer mortality is reduced via low-dose CT screening and treatment of early-stage disease. Evidence-based smoking cessation treatment in the lung screening setting can further reduce mortality. We report the results of a cessation trial from the NCI's SCALE collaboration.

METHODS

Eligible patients (N = 818) aged 50-80 were randomized (May 2017-January 2021) to the Intensive vs. Minimal arms (8 vs. 3 phone sessions plus 8 vs. 2 weeks of nicotine patches, respectively). Bio-verified (primary) and self-reported 7-day abstinence rates were assessed 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-randomization. Logistic regression analyses evaluated the effects of study arm. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

Participants reported 48.0 (SD = 17.2) pack-years and 51.6% were not ready to quit in < 30 days. Self-reported 3-month quit rates were significantly higher in the Intensive vs. Minimal arm (14.3% vs. 7.9%; OR = 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.26,3.18). Bio-verified abstinence was lower but with similar relative differences between arms (9.1% vs. 3.9%; OR = 2.70, 95% CI = 1.44, 5.08). Compared to the Minimal arm, the Intensive arm was more effective among those with greater nicotine dependence (OR = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.55, 7.76), normal screening results (OR = 2.58, 95% CI = 1.32, 5.03), high engagement in counseling (OR = 3.03, 95% CI = 1.50, 6.14) and patch use (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.39, 5.68). Abstinence rates did not differ significantly between arms at 6-months (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 0.68, 2.11) or 12-months (OR = 1.4, 95% CI = 0.82, 2.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivering intensive telephone counseling and nicotine replacement with lung screening is an effective strategy to increase short-term smoking cessation. Methods to maintain short-term effects are needed. Even with modest quit rates, integrating cessation treatment into lung screening programs may have a large impact on tobacco-related mortality.

Psychological predictors of delayed active treatment following active surveillance for low‐risk prostate cancer: The Patient REported outcomes for Prostate cARE prospective cohort study

Objectives

In a prospective, comparative effectiveness study, we assessed clinical and psychological factors associated with switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT) among low‐risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients.

Methods

Using ultra‐rapid case identification, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1139) with low‐risk patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason≤6) and follow‐up interviews 6–10 months post‐diagnosis (N = 1057). Among men remaining on AS for at least 12 months (N = 601), we compared those who continued on AS (N = 515) versus men who underwent delayed AT (N = 86) between 13 and 24 months, using Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Delayed AT was predicted by time dependent PSA levels (≥10 vs. <10; HR = 5.6, 95% CI 2.4–13.1) and Gleason scores (≥7 vs. ≤6; adjusted HR = 20.2, 95% CI 12.2–33.4). Further, delayed AT was more likely among men whose urologist initially recommended AT (HR = 2.13, 95% CI 1.07–4.22), for whom tumour removal was very important (HR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.35–3.52), and who reported greater worry about not detecting disease progression early (HR = 1.67, 1.05–2.65). In exploratory analyses, 31% (27/86) switched to AT without evidence of progression, while 4.7% (24/515) remained on AS with evidence of progression.

Conclusions

After adjusting for clinical evidence of disease progression over the first year post‐diagnosis, we found that urologists' initial treatment recommendation and patients' early treatment preferences and concerns about AS each independently predicted undergoing delayed AT during the second year post‐diagnosis. These findings, along with almost one‐half undergoing delayed AT without evidence of progression, suggest the need for greater decision support to remain on AS when it is clinically indicated.

Abstract PS9-26: Pelvic floor disorders and quality of life among breast cancer survivors

Introduction: Approximately 25% of women in the United States experience a symptomatic pelvic floor disorder such as urinary incontinence, pelvic organ prolapse, anal incontinence, and sexual dysfunction. Aspects associated with breast cancer treatment such a chemotherapy, oophorectomy/ovarian suppression, and endocrine therapy may predispose women to pelvic floor disorders. The prevalence of pelvic floor disorders among breast cancer survivors has been cited at 18%, but unpublished cross-sectional data suggests the prevalence may be much higher. In this study, 8.5% - 11.5% of participants experienced prolapse symptoms, 56.2% experienced anal incontinence symptoms, and 43.3% - 51.2% experience urinary incontinence symptoms. While pelvic floor dysfunction is associated with lower quality of life, it is unknown if breast cancer survivors with pelvic floor disorders experience decreased quality of life. The primary aim of this study was to assess if breast cancer survivors with pelvic floor disorders experience lower quality of life.

Methods: Women 18 years or older who were previously treated for breast cancer and who were enrolled in a cancer research registry were invited to complete the Pelvic Floor Distress Inventory 20 (PFDI-20), the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), and the Short Form 12. Demographic and clinical data were abstracted from the research registry. A participant was considered eligible for the study if she had enrolled in the cancer registry and completed all core questions (i.e. demographics, cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, endocrine therapy, medical/surgical history, and risk factors). As per standard PFDI-20 reporting, presence of a symptom was defined as answering a 1, 2, 3, or 4 to a question, while presence of a bothersome symptom was defined as answering a 2, 3, or 4. A score of 26 or less on the FSFI was considered indicative of sexual dysfunction.

Results: A total of 634 women were considered eligible for enrollment in the study. 445 were able to be contacted, and 410 women agreed to participate in the study. Of those, 303 returned the PFDI-20 questionnaire and FSFI questionnaire, and 264 returned the SF-12 for response rates of 74% and 64%, respectively. Overall, higher scores on the PFDI-20 was associated with lower scores on both the physical and mental components of the SF-12 (Rho = -0.298, p = &lt;.0001; Rho = -0.202, p = .0009, respectively). When the PFDI-20 was broken into subscores, higher POPDI scores (prolapse) was associated with lower physical component scores but not lower mental component scores. Higher CRADI scores (anal incontinence) and UDI-6 scores (urinary incontinence) were associated with lower physical and mental scores. Neither overall FSFI scores or subset domain scores were associated with lower physical or mental component scores of the SF-12. In linear regression analysis, PFDI summary score remained statistically significantly related to both mental and physical component subscores after controlling for age, race, stage of breast cancer, time since diagnosis, and use of adjuvant endocrine therapy. FSFI scores were related to age and endocrine therapy use, but were not related to SF-12 scores.

Conclusion: Among a subset of breast cancer survivors, pelvic disorders including pelvic organ prolapse, urinary incontinence, and anal incontinence exist, and these disorders are associated with decreased mental wellbeing. All pelvic floor disorders except pelvic organ prolapse were associated with decreased physical wellbeing. None of the domains of female sexual dysfunction were associated with decreased physical or mental wellbeing among breast cancer survivors. A subset of breast cancer survivors experiences bothersome pelvic floor disorders and thus screening for these disorders can increase referrals to appropriate treatment and complement survivorship care to enhance overall quality of life.

Citation Format: Jon F Pennycuff, Felice Yang, Tania Lobo, Caroline Jackman, Colleen McGuire, Ami Chitalia, Kristi Graves. Pelvic floor disorders and quality of life among breast cancer survivors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2020 San Antonio Breast Cancer Virtual Symposium; 2020 Dec 8-11; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PS9-26.

Implementation of the Smoking Treatment and Recovery (STAR) program: healthy cancer survivorship through integrated tobacco control

PURPOSE

It is well-established that persistent tobacco use among patients with cancer results in numerous adverse outcomes. However, the assessment and treatment of tobacco use with evidence-based methods have been lacking in cancer care. Our cancer center has established its first tobacco treatment program, a multidisciplinary, evidence-based, clinical program for hematology/oncology patients.

METHODS

We describe the development and implementation of the program, emphasizing lessons learned in treating nicotine addiction among patients who are at very high risk for continuing to use tobacco throughout the survivorship phase.

RESULTS

We developed a system to assess tobacco use at each outpatient visit, from those recently diagnosed to long-term survivors. For patients who have smoked in the past month, the protocol offers standard behavioral and pharmacological treatments, delivered by tobacco treatment specialists and nurse practitioners over four in-person and/or telephone-based sessions. Partnerships with the Psychosocial Oncology and Cancer Survivorship Programs have provided integrated and comprehensive care for patients during and after their cancer treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The systematic efforts to reach and engage current smokers have laid the groundwork for maximizing the program's future effectiveness and impact. Our initial results demonstrate not only the complexities but also the feasibility of developing a new tobacco treatment program in the oncology setting.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

The implications for cancer survivors are the significant improvements in treatment outcomes that occur with tobacco abstinence.

Selecting Active Surveillance: Decision Making Factors for Men with a Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

Background. Men with a low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) should consider observation, particularly active surveillance (AS), a monitoring strategy that avoids active treatment (AT) in the absence of disease progression. Objective. To determine clinical and decision-making factors predicting treatment selection. Design. Prospective cohort study. Setting. Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). Patients. Men newly diagnosed with low-risk PCa between 2012 and 2014 who remained enrolled in KPNC for 12 months following diagnosis. Measurements. We used surveys and medical record abstractions to measure sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and psychological and decision-making factors. Men were classified as being on observation if they did not undergo AT within 12 months of diagnosis. We performed multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results. The average age of the 1171 subjects was 61.5 years (s = 7.2 years), and 81% were white. Overall, 639 (57%) were managed with observation; in adjusted analyses, significant predictors of observation included awareness of low-risk status (odds ratio 1.75; 95% confidence interval 1.04-2.94), knowing that observation was an option (3.62; 1.62-8.09), having concerns about treatment-related quality of life (1.21, 1.09-1.34), reporting a urologist recommendation for observation (8.20; 4.68-14.4), and having a lower clinical stage (T1c v. T2a, 2.11; 1.16-3.84). Conversely, valuing cancer control (1.54; 1.37-1.72) and greater decisional certainty (1.66; 1.18-2.35) were predictive of AT. Limitations. Results may be less generalizable to other types of health care systems and to more diverse populations. Conclusions. Many participants selected observation, and this was associated with tumor characteristics. However, nonclinical decisional factors also independently predicted treatment selection. Efforts to provide early decision support, particularly targeting knowledge deficits, and reassurance to men with low-risk cancers may facilitate better decision making and increase uptake of observation, particularly AS.

Quality of life among men with low-risk prostate cancer during the first year following diagnosis: the PREPARE prospective cohort study

As many as 40% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer have low-risk disease, which results in the need to decide whether to undergo active treatment (AT) or active surveillance (AS). The treatment decision can have a significant effect on general and prostate-specific quality of life (QOL). The purpose of this study was to assess the QOL among men with low-risk prostate cancer during the first year following diagnosis. In a prospective cohort study, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1,139; 69.3% response rate) with low-risk PCa patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason ≤ 6) and a follow-up assessment 6-10 months postdiagnosis (N = 1057; 93%). We assessed general depression, anxiety, and physical functioning, prostate-specific anxiety, and prostate-specific QOL at both interviews. Clinical variables were obtained from the medical record. Men were 61.7 (SD = 7.2) years old, 82% white, 39% had undergone AT (surgery or radiation), and 61.0% had begun AS. Linear regression analyses revealed that at follow-up, the AS group reported significantly better sexual, bowel, urinary, and general physical function (compared to AT), and no difference in depression. However, the AS group did report greater general anxiety and prostate-specific anxiety at follow-up, compared to AT. Among men with low-risk PCa, adjusting for pretreatment functioning, the AS group reported better prostate-related QOL, but were worse off on general and prostate-specific anxiety compared to men on AT. These results suggest that, within the first year postdiagnosis, men who did not undergo AT may require additional support in order to remain comfortable with this decision and to continue with AS when it is clinically indicated.

Clinical and Psychological Predictors of Switching from Active Surveillance to Active Treatment among Men with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer: the PREPARE Prospective Cohort Study

Numerous observational studies have assessed the clinical predictors of switching from active surveillance (AS) to active treatment (AT), but few have assessed psychological and decisional predictors. In a prospective, comparative effectiveness cohort study of men newly diagnosed with low-risk PCa, we assessed whether psychological and decisional factors predicted switching to AT after adjusting for clinical factors. We conducted pre-treatment telephone interviews (N = 1,139; 69.3% participation) with low-risk PCa patients (PSA &lt; 10, Gleason &lt; 7) and a follow-up assessment 6–10 months post-diagnosis (N = 1057; 93%). Clinical variables were obtained from the medical record. The current analysis included men who were on AS for up to 24 months (N = 515), compared to men on AS for &gt;12 months who switched to AT between 12–24 months (N = 86). In Cox proportional hazard models, we included 2 time-dependent covariates measured between diagnosis and 24-months post-diagnosis: PSA (&lt;4, 4–9.99, 10+) and Gleason score (&lt;7, 7+, no surveillance biopsy). Baseline covariates included age (X = 62.3 (SD = 7.0), first degree relative with PCa (25%), number of positive cores (&lt;2 = 75%), urologist initial treatment recommendation (14% AT). Covariates measured at 6 months included prostate- specific anxiety, decisional satisfaction, decisional uncertainty, and preference for shared vs. independent decisions. The fully adjusted model indicated that switching to an active treatment was more likely among those with a PSA &gt; 10 (HR 5.6, 2.4–13.1), Gleason 7+ (HR 20.2, 12.2–33.4), and the urologist's initial recommendation of AT (HR 2.1, 1.04–4.2). The psychological variables, including preference for making independent treatment decisions (HR 2.7, 1.07–6.9) and concern that disease progression will not be detected (HR 1.5, 0.95–2.4), were independently associated with undergoing AT. After adjusting for clinical evidence of disease progression over the first two years post-diagnosis, men's concerns that disease progression will not be detected and preference for making their own treatment decision each independently predicted undergoing AT. These findings suggest the need to provide information and assistance to men who may be uncertain about remaining on AS, particularly when AS remains clinically indicated.

Biospecimen donation among black and white breast cancer survivors: opportunities to promote precision medicine

PURPOSE

Advances in precision medicine (PM) have potential to reduce and/or eliminate breast cancer disparities in both treatment and survivorship. However, compared to white Americans, black Americans are often underrepresented in genetic research. This report assessed factors that influence receipt of buccal cells via saliva kits.

METHODS

This prospective study recruited women with confirmed hormonal-positive (HR+) breast cancer (BC). A standardized telephone survey collected sociodemographic, socio-cultural (e.g., religiosity), and healthcare process factors. Clinical information was abstracted from medical records. After the baseline survey, return postage-paid envelopes and mouthwash collection kits were mailed. Univariate and adjusted logistic regression models estimated the probability of biospecimen donation.

RESULTS

Seventy percent of the sample provided buccal cells which were of good quality. No differences were noted by race or other demographic factors. In the multivariable logistic model, time spent with providers (OR 1.61 per 1-point increase; 95% CI 1.242, 2.088) and religiosity (OR 0.957 per 1-point increase; 95% CI 0.931, 0.984) remained associated with biospecimen provision. Women with lower-stage cancer (vs. higher stage III+) were more likely to donate biospecimens (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer care experiences predicted specimen donation. Understanding the contextual reasons for lower receipt among women with higher religiosity scores and higher stage warrants further examination.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS

PM is relevant to cancer survivors because of its potential to inform targeted therapies, understand disease resistance, and aide in prediction of toxicity and/or recurrence. Future efforts to launch precision medicine trials with BC survivors may benefit from engaging medical oncologists and/or leveraging patient-provider encounters for trial participation.

Decision-making processes among men with low-risk prostate cancer: A survey study

OBJECTIVE

To characterize decision-making processes and outcomes among men expressing early-treatment preferences for low-risk prostate cancer.

METHODS

We conducted telephone surveys of men newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer in 2012 to 2014. We analyzed subjects who had discussed prostate cancer treatment with a clinician and expressed a treatment preference. We asked about decision-making processes, including physician discussions, prostate-cancer knowledge, decision-making styles, treatment preference, and decisional conflict. We compared the responses across treatment groups with χ² or ANOVA.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 761) had a median age of 62; 82% were white, 45% had a college education, and 35% had no comorbidities. Surveys were conducted at a median of 25 days (range 9-100) post diagnosis. Overall, 55% preferred active surveillance (AS), 26% preferred surgery, and 19% preferred radiotherapy. Participants reported routinely considering surgery, radiotherapy, and AS. Most were aware of their low-risk status (97%) and the option for AS (96%). However, men preferring active treatment (AT) were often unaware of treatment complications, including sexual dysfunction (23%) and urinary complications (41%). Most men (63%) wanted to make their own decision after considering the doctor's opinion, and about 90% reported being sufficiently involved in the treatment discussion. Men preferring AS had slightly more uncertainty about their decisions than those preferring AT.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects were actively engaged in decision making and considered a range of treatments. However, we found knowledge gaps about treatment complications among those preferring AT and slightly more decisional uncertainty among those preferring AS, suggesting the need for early decision support.

United States Population-Based Estimates of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Symptom and Functional Status Reference Values for Individuals With Cancer

Purpose To estimate cancer population-based reference values in the United States for eight PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) domains by age and stage of disease. Patients and Methods For the Measuring Your Health (MY-Health) study, persons newly diagnosed with cancer (prostate, colorectal, non-small-cell lung, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, breast, uterine, or cervical) from 2010 to 2012 (N = 5,284) were recruited through the National Cancer Institute's SEER Program. Participants were mailed surveys 6 to 13 months after diagnosis. Raking by race/ethnicity, age, and stage generated weighted average PROMIS scores for pain interference, fatigue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, physical function, ability to participate in social roles, and cognitive function. PROMIS measures are standardized to a T-score metric, with a score of 50 representing the general US population mean. Clinically meaningful differences were defined as a 3-point difference in scores. Results Several reference values (means) for patients with cancer were worse than the general United States population norms of 50. These include pain interference (52.4), fatigue (52.2), and physical function (44.1). Reference values were highest (ie, showed greatest symptom burden) in lung cancer (pain interference, 55.5; fatigue, 57.3; depression, 51.4) and cervical cancer (anxiety, 53.2; sleep disturbance, 53.4). Reference values for patients age 65 to 84 years reported lower sleep disturbance, anxiety, and depression, and better cognitive function than younger patients. Cancer reference values were poorer among those with advanced disease compared with patients with limited or no evidence of disease, specifically physical function (41.1 v 46.6, respectively), fatigue (55.8 v 50.2, respectively), and pain interference (55.2 v 50.9, respectively). Conclusion In a large, population-based sample of patients with recently diagnosed cancer, we observed symptom severity and functional deficits by age, stage, and cancer type consistent with the expected impact of cancer diagnosis and treatment. These United States cancer reference values can help facilitate interpretation of the PROMIS domain scores in research studies or in clinical applications that measure and evaluate the symptom and functional burden patients with cancer experience after initial treatment.

Responsiveness of 8 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures in a large, community-based cancer study cohort

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) was a National Institutes of Health-funded initiative to develop measures of symptoms and function. Responsiveness is the degree to which a measure can detect underlying changes over time. The objective of the current study was to document the responsiveness of 8 PROMIS measures in a large, population-based cancer cohort.

METHODS

The Measuring Your Health study recruited 2968 patients who were diagnosed with 1 of 7 cancers between 2010 and 2012 through 4 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries. Participants completed a baseline survey (6-13 months after diagnosis) and a 6-month follow-up survey. Changes in 8 PROMIS scores were compared with global ratings of transition, changes in performance status, and clinical events.

RESULTS

Measures were responsive to 6-month declines and improvements in performance status with small to large effect sizes (ES) (Cohen d = 0.34-0.71; P < .01). Mean changes and effect sizes were larger for participants who reported declines compared with those who reported improvements. Small-to-medium ES were observed in patients who reported being "a little" worse (d = 0.31-0.56), and medium-to-large ES were observed in those who reported being "a lot" worse (d = 0.53-0.72). Hospitalized participants reported significant score increases, resulting in worsening of pain (d = 0.51), fatigue (d = 0.35), and depression (d = 0.57; all P < .01). Cancer recurrence and progression were associated with smaller increases in pain, fatigue, and sleep disturbance (d = 0.22-0.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The current results indicated that all 8 PROMIS measures were sensitive to patient-perceived worsening and improvement and to major clinical events. These findings will be able to inform the design and interpretation of future research studies and clinical initiatives administering PROMIS measures. Cancer 2017;123:327-335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Adoption of Gene Expression Profiling for Breast Cancer in US Oncology Practice for Women Younger Than 65 Years

BACKGROUND

A number of practice guidelines incorporate the use of gene expression profiling (GEP) tests for early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast tumors. Few studies describe factors associated with GEP testing in US oncology practice. We assessed the relationship between clinical, demographic, and group-level socioeconomic variables and test use in women younger than 65 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 5 state cancer registries were linked with insurance claims data and GEP test results. We assessed rates of testing and variables associated with test use in an incident cohort of 9,444 commercially insured women younger than 65 years, newly diagnosed with stage I or II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer from 2006 through 2012.

RESULTS

Rates of testing for women with N0 disease increased from 20.4% in 2006 to 35.2% in 2011. Variables associated with higher rates of testing, beyond clinical factors such as nodal status (P<.001), included being diagnosed from 2008 through 2012 versus 2006 through 2007 (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.67; 95% CI, 1.47-1.90), having preexisting comorbidities (adjusted OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14-1.59), and higher out-of-pocket pharmacy costs (adjusted OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.40-1.97). Women younger than 50 years were more likely to be tested if they had stage I versus stage II disease (P<.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In an insured population of women younger than 65 years, GEP testing increased after its inclusion in clinical practice guidelines and mounting evidence. Additional research is needed to better understand oncologists' decision not to order GEP testing for their patients who are otherwise eligible.

Treatment Preferences for Active Surveillance versus Active Treatment among Men with Low-Risk Prostate Cancer

BACKGROUND

Due to the concerns about the overtreatment of low-risk prostate cancer, active surveillance (AS) is now a recommended alternative to the active treatments (AT) of surgery and radiotherapy. However, AS is not widely utilized, partially due to psychological and decision-making factors associated with treatment preferences.

METHODS

In a longitudinal cohort study, we conducted pretreatment telephone interviews (N = 1,140, 69.3% participation) with newly diagnosed, low-risk prostate cancer patients (PSA ≤ 10, Gleason ≤ 6) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. We assessed psychological and decision-making variables, and treatment preference [AS, AT, and No Preference (NP)].

RESULTS

Men were 61.5 (SD, 7.3) years old, 24 days (median) after diagnosis, and 81.1% white. Treatment preferences were: 39.3% AS, 30.9% AT, and 29.7% NP. Multinomial logistic regression revealed that men preferring AS (vs. AT) were older (OR, 1.64; CI, 1.07-2.51), more educated (OR, 2.05; CI, 1.12-3.74), had greater prostate cancer knowledge (OR, 1.77; CI, 1.43-2.18) and greater awareness of having low-risk cancer (OR, 3.97; CI, 1.96-8.06), but also were less certain about their treatment preference (OR, 0.57; CI, 0.41-0.8), had greater prostate cancer anxiety (OR, 1.22; CI, 1.003-1.48), and preferred a shared treatment decision (OR, 2.34; CI, 1.37-3.99). Similarly, men preferring NP (vs. AT) were less certain about treatment preference, preferred a shared decision, and had greater knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a substantial proportion of men preferred AS, this was associated with anxiety and uncertainty, suggesting that this may be a difficult choice.

IMPACT

Increasing the appropriate use of AS for low-risk prostate cancer will require additional reassurance and information, and reaching men almost immediately after diagnosis while the decision-making is ongoing. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 25(8); 1240-50. ©2016 AACR.

Sociodemographic and Clinical Predictors of Switching to Active Treatment among a Large, Ethnically Diverse Cohort of Men with Low Risk Prostate Cancer on Observational Management

PURPOSE

We determined the clinical and sociodemographic predictors of beginning active treatment in an ethnically diverse population of men with low risk prostate cancer initially on observational treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied men diagnosed with low risk prostate cancer between 2004 and 2012 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California who did not receive any treatment within the first year of diagnosis and had at least 2 years of followup. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to determine factors associated with time from diagnosis to active treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 2,228 eligible men who were initially on observation, of whom 27% began active treatment during followup at a median of 2.9 years. NonHispanic black men were marginally more likely to begin active treatment than nonHispanic white men independent of baseline and followup clinical measures (HR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0-1.7). Among men who remained on observation nonHispanic black men were rebiopsied within 24 months of diagnosis at a slightly lower rate than nonHispanic white men (HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.6-1.0). Gleason grade progression (HR 3.3, 95% CI 2.7-4.1) and PSA doubling time less than 48 months (HR 2.9, 95% CI 2.3-3.7) were associated with initiation of active treatment independent of race.

CONCLUSIONS

Sociodemographic factors such as ethnicity and education may independently influence the patient decision to pursue active treatment and serial biopsies during active surveillance. These factors are important for further studies of prostate cancer treatment decision making.

Radiation therapy at the end of life: a population-based study examining palliative treatment intensity

Background

To examine factors associated with the use of radiation therapy (RT) at the end of life in patients with breast, prostate, or colorectal cancer.

Methods

Using data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) – Medicare database, patients were over age 65 and diagnosed between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2011 with any stage of cancer when the cause of death, as defined by SEER, was cancer; or with stage 4 cancer, who died of any cause. We employed multiple logistic regression models to identify patient and health systems factors associated with palliative radiation use.

Results

50% of patients received RT in the last 6 months of life. RT was used less frequently in older patients and in non-Hispanic white patients. Similar patterns were observed in the last 14 days of life. Chemotherapy use in the last 6 months of life was strongly correlated with receiving RT in the last 6 months (OR 2.72, 95% CI: 2.59-2.88) and last 14 days of life (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.40-1.66). Patients receiving RT accrued more emergency department visits, radiographic exams and physician visits (all comparisons p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Among patients with breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer, palliative RT use was common. End-of-life RT correlated with end-of-life chemotherapy use, including in the last 14 days of life, when treatment may cause increased treatment burden without improved quality of life. Research is needed optimize the role and timing of RT in palliative care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13014-014-0305-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The atomic approach to the Anderson model for the finite U case: application to a quantum dot

In the present work we apply the atomic approach to the single-impurity Anderson model (SIAM). A general formulation of this approach, that can be applied both to the impurity and to the lattice Anderson Hamiltonian, was developed in a previous work (Foglio et al 2009 arxiv: 0903.0139v2 [cond-mat.str-el]). The method starts from the cumulant expansion of the periodic Anderson model, employing the hybridization as a perturbation. The atomic Anderson limit is analytically solved and its sixteen eigenenergies and eigenstates are obtained. This atomic Anderson solution, which we call the AAS, has all the fundamental excitations that generate the Kondo effect, and in the atomic approach is employed as a 'seed' to generate the approximate solutions for finite U. The width of the conduction band is reduced to zero in the AAS, and we choose its position such that the Friedel sum rule is satisfied, close to the chemical potential mu. We perform a complete study of the density of states of the SIAM over the whole relevant range of parameters: the empty dot, intermediate valence, Kondo and magnetic regimes. In the Kondo regime we obtain a density of states that characterizes well the structure of the Kondo peak. To show the usefulness of the method we have calculated the conductance of a quantum dot, side-coupled to a conduction band.