Search

Purpose: This study compared Lynch syndrome universal tumor screening (UTS) across multiple health systems (some of which had 2 or more distinct UTS programs) to understand multilevel factors that may affect the successful implementation of complex programs., Methods: Data from 66 stakeholder interviews were used to conduct multivalue coincidence analysis and identify key factors that consistently make a difference in whether UTS programs were implemented and optimized at the system level., Results: The selected coincidence analysis model revealed combinations of conditions that distinguish 4 optimized UTS programs, 10 nonoptimized programs, and 4 systems with no program. Fully optimized UTS programs had both a maintenance champion and a positive inner setting. Two independent paths were unique to nonoptimized programs: (1) positive attitudes and a mixed inner setting or (2) limited planning and engaging among stakeholders. Negative views about UTS evidence or lack of knowledge about UTS led to a lack of planning and engaging, which subsequently prevented program implementation., Conclusion: The model improved our understanding of program implementation in health care systems and informed the creation of a toolkit to guide UTS implementation, optimization, and changes. Our findings and toolkit may serve as a use case to increase the successful implementation of other complex precision health programs., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest No competing financial interests are reported by any authors in relation to the work described in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite increased recognition that structural racism contributes to poorer health outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities, there are knowledge gaps about how current patterns of racial residential segregation are associated with cancer screening uptake. The authors examined associations between Black residential segregation and screening for colorectal cancer (CRC) and cervical cancer among non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White adults., Methods: This was a retrospective study of CRC and cervical cancer screening-eligible adults from five health care systems within the Population-Based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) Consortium (cohort entry, 2010-2012). Residential segregation was measured using site-specific quartiles of the Black local isolation score (LIS). The outcome was receipt of CRC or cervical cancer screening within 3 years of cohort entry (2010-2015). Logistic regression was used to calculate associations between the LIS and screening completion, adjusting for patient-level covariates., Results: Among CRC (n = 642,661) and cervical cancer (n = 163,340) screening-eligible patients, 456,526 (71.0%) and 106,124 (65.0%), respectively, received screening. Across PROSPR sites, living in neighborhoods with higher LIS tended to be associated with lower odds of CRC screening (Kaiser Permanente Northern California: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] LIS trend in Black patients, 0.95 [p < .001]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.98 [p < .001]; Kaiser Permanente Southern California: aOR LIS trend in Black patients, 0.98 [p = .026]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 1.01 [p = .023]; Kaiser Permanente Washington: aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.97 [p = .002]. However, for cervical cancer screening, associations with the LIS varied by site and race (Kaiser Permanente Washington: aOR LIS trend in White patients, 0.95 [p < .001]; Mass General Brigham: aOR LIS trend in Black patients, 1.12 [p < .001]; aOR LIS trend in White patients, 1.03 [p < .001])., Conclusions: Across five diverse health care systems, the direction of the association between Black residential segregation and screening varied by PROSPR site, race, and screening type. Additional research, including studies that examine multiple dimensions of segregation and structural racism using intersectional approaches, are needed to further disentangle these relationships., (© 2024 American Cancer Society.)

Importance: Postpolypectomy surveillance is a common colonoscopy indication in older adults; however, guidelines provide little direction on when to stop surveillance in this population., Objective: To estimate surveillance colonoscopy yields in older adults., Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study included individuals 70 to 85 years of age who received surveillance colonoscopy at a large, community-based US health care system between January 1, 2017, and December 31, 2019; had an adenoma detected 12 or more months previously; and had at least 1 year of health plan enrollment before surveillance. Individuals were excluded due to prior colorectal cancer (CRC), hereditary CRC syndrome, inflammatory bowel disease, or prior colectomy or if the surveillance colonoscopy had an inadequate bowel preparation or was incomplete. Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, to February 22, 2024., Exposures: Age (70-74, 75-79, or 80-85 years) at surveillance colonoscopy and prior adenoma finding (ie, advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were yields of CRC, advanced adenoma, and advanced neoplasia overall (all ages) by age group and by both age group and prior adenoma finding. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with advanced neoplasia detection at surveillance., Results: Of 9740 surveillance colonoscopies among 9601 patients, 5895 (60.5%) were in men, and 5738 (58.9%), 3225 (33.1%), and 777 (8.0%) were performed in those aged 70-74, 75-79, and 80-85 years, respectively. Overall, CRC yields were found in 28 procedures (0.3%), advanced adenoma in 1141 (11.7%), and advanced neoplasia in 1169 (12.0%); yields did not differ significantly across age groups. Overall, CRC yields were higher for colonoscopies among patients with a prior advanced adenoma vs nonadvanced adenoma (12 of 2305 [0.5%] vs 16 of 7435 [0.2%]; P = .02), and the same was observed for advanced neoplasia (380 of 2305 [16.5%] vs 789 of 7435 [10.6%]; P < .001). Factors associated with advanced neoplasia at surveillance were prior advanced adenoma (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.65; 95% CI, 1.44-1.88), body mass index of 30 or greater vs less than 25 (AOR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.44), and having ever smoked tobacco (AOR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01-1.30). Asian or Pacific Islander race was inversely associated with advanced neoplasia (AOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99)., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of surveillance colonoscopy yield in older adults, CRC detection was rare regardless of prior adenoma finding, whereas the advanced neoplasia yield was 12.0% overall. Yields were higher among those with a prior advanced adenoma than among those with prior nonadvanced adenoma and did not increase significantly with age. These findings can help inform whether to continue surveillance colonoscopy in older adults.

Background: Little is known about SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 severity among a growing population of cancer survivors. We describe the association of infection and related hospitalization by recency of cancer diagnosis in a large U.S. cohort., Methods: Participants were sent electronic surveys between April 2020 and January 2021 to collect information on SARS-CoV-2 infection and potential COVID-19-related risk factors. SARS-CoV-2 infections were identified using survey report of a COVID-19-positive test and electronic health record data. Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection was estimated up to 365 days from baseline survey and stratified by recency of cancer diagnosis. Among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection, we used logistic regression to estimate the association between recency of cancer diagnosis and hospitalization within 30 days of infection., Results: Cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection at 365 days was 3.3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.2%-3.5%] among those without cancer history and ranged from 2.8% (95% CI, 2.3%-3.5%) to 3.7% (95% CI, 2.9%-4.7%) among those with a history of cancer depending on recency. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of hospitalization within 30 days following SARS-CoV-2 infection by cancer diagnosis recency., Conclusions: Our null findings are consistent with other studies on COVID-19 infection risk in cancer survivors, where COVID-19 severity and sequelae were independent of cancer history and were likely associated with factors such as intensive care unit admission, noncancer comorbid conditions, and long-term care residency., Impact: This study can inform COVID-19 risk-counseling of cancer survivors and their caregivers as we continue to contend with COVID-19., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Signs and red flag symptoms in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients who are below the recommended screening age are often overlooked, leading to delayed diagnosis and worse prognosis. This study investigates how patient pre-diagnostic symptoms are associated with anatomic site of their cancer and whether the association varies by age at CRC diagnosis., Methods: We ascertained CRC patients' experienced symptoms and screening through medical abstractions from an ongoing population-based study of CRC patients identified through a SEER cancer registry (N = 626). We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the association between symptoms and CRC anatomic site. Additional analyses were stratified by age at diagnosis. Early-onset was defined as less than 50 years of age at CRC diagnosis., Results: Participants who experienced blood in stool were more likely (odds ratio (95% confidence interval)) to have rectal (vs. colon) cancer (4.37 (3.02, 6.33)), as were patients who experienced changes to stool (1.78 (1.21, 2.60)). Patients diagnosed with colon cancer were more likely to present with abdominal pain (0.30 (0.19, 0.47)), anemia (0.40 (0.21, 0.75)), other symptoms (0.33 (0.19, 0.55)) and no symptoms (0.68 (0.44, 1.04)). When stratifying by age at diagnosis, we found that the association between blood in stool and rectal tumor location was particularly pronounced for patients with early-onset CRC (6.48 (2.73, 15.41))., Conclusions: Common pre-diagnostic red flag symptoms are associated with CRC anatomic site. These findings can inform best practices for gastroenterologist triage of care and early evaluation of CRC and are of key importance given the rise of early-onset (pre-screening age) CRC., Trial Registration: Not applicable to this study and analysis., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

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.

Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality but can lead to downstream procedures, complications, and other potential harms. Estimates of these events outside NLST (National Lung Screening Trial) have been variable and lacked evaluation by screening result, which allows more direct comparison with trials., Objective: To identify rates of downstream procedures and complications associated with LCS., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: 5 U.S. health care systems., Patients: Individuals who completed a baseline LDCT scan for LCS between 2014 and 2018., Measurements: Outcomes included downstream imaging, invasive diagnostic procedures, and procedural complications. For each, absolute rates were calculated overall and stratified by screening result and by lung cancer detection, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated., Results: Among the 9266 screened patients, 1472 (15.9%) had a baseline LDCT scan showing abnormalities, of whom 140 (9.5%) were diagnosed with lung cancer within 12 months (positive predictive value, 9.5% [95% CI, 8.0% to 11.0%]; negative predictive value, 99.8% [CI, 99.7% to 99.9%]; sensitivity, 92.7% [CI, 88.6% to 96.9%]; specificity, 84.4% [CI, 83.7% to 85.2%]). Absolute rates of downstream imaging and invasive procedures in screened patients were 31.9% and 2.8%, respectively. In patients undergoing invasive procedures after abnormal findings, complication rates were substantially higher than those in NLST (30.6% vs. 17.7% for any complication; 20.6% vs. 9.4% for major complications)., Limitation: Assessment of outcomes was retrospective and was based on procedural coding., Conclusion: The results indicate substantially higher rates of downstream procedures and complications associated with LCS in practice than observed in NLST. Diagnostic management likely needs to be assessed and improved to ensure that screening benefits outweigh potential harms., Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute and Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-0653.

Purpose: To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on depression, anxiety, and loneliness between those with and without a history of cancer., Design: This prospective observational study used a quantitative approach., Participants: Adult members of the Kaiser Permanente Research Bank ( N  = 104,640)., Methods: Participants completed a series of surveys from May to December 2020. The difference in score of depression, anxiety, and loneliness were estimated using linear mixed regression., Findings: Among cancer survivors, 21% and 19% met the thresholds for increased risk of depression and anxiety. Among cancer survivors, younger age groups and females reported increased depression, anxiety, and loneliness scores., Conclusions: This study highlights the continued necessity of addressing mental health needs and social support in cancer survivors during and after a public health emergency., Implications for Psychosocial Providers: Cancer survivors may need particular resources after cancer treatment to strengthen resilience and improve quality of life.

Background: Lynch syndrome (LS) is the most common cause of inherited colorectal cancer (CRC). Universal tumor screening (UTS) of newly diagnosed CRC cases is recommended to aid in diagnosis of LS and reduce cancer-related morbidity and mortality. However, not all health systems have adopted UTS processes and implementation may be inconsistent due to system and patient-level complexities., Methods: To identify barriers, facilitators, and suggestions for improvements of the UTS process from the patient perspective, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with patients recently diagnosed with CRC, but not screened for or aware of LS. Patients were recruited from eight regionally diverse US health systems. Interviews were conducted by telephone, 60-minutes, audio-recorded, and transcribed. An inductive, constant comparative analysis approach was employed.  RESULTS: We completed 75 interviews across the eight systems. Most participants were white (79%), about half (52%) were men, and the mean age was 60 years. Most self-reported either no (60%) or minimal (40%) prior awareness of LS. Overall, 96% of patients stated UTS should be a routine standard of care for CRC tumors, consistently citing four primary motivations for wanting to know their LS status and engage in the process for LS identification: "knowledge is power"; "family knowledge"; "prevention and detection"; and "treatment and surveillance." Common concerns pertaining to the process of screening for and identifying LS included: creating anticipatory worry for patients, the potential cost and the accuracy of the genetic test, and possibly having one's health insurance coverage impacted by the LS diagnosis. Patients suggested health systems communicate LS results in-person or by phone from a trained expert in LS; offer proactive verbal and written education about LS, the screening steps, and any follow-up surveillance recommendations; and support patients in communicating their LS screening to any of their blood relatives., Conclusion: Our qualitative findings demonstrate patients with CRC have a strong desire for healthcare systems to regularly implement and offer UTS. Patients offer key insights for health systems to guide future implementation and optimization of UTS and other LS screening programs and maximize diagnosis of individuals with LS and improve cancer-related surveillance and outcomes., Trial Registration: Not available: not a clinical trial., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Colorectal cancer screening is universally recommended for adults ages 45 to 75 years. Noninvasive fecal occult blood tests are effective screening tests recommended by guidelines. However, empirical evidence to inform older adults' decisions about whether to continue screening is sparse, especially for individuals with prior screening., Methods: This study used a retrospective cohort of older adults at three Kaiser Permanente integrated healthcare systems (Northern California, Southern California, Washington) and Parkland Health. Beginning 1 year following a negative stool-based screening test, cumulative risks of colorectal cancer incidence, colorectal cancer mortality (accounting for deaths from other causes), and non-colorectal cancer mortality were estimated., Results: Cumulative incidence of colorectal cancer in screen-eligible adults ages 76 to 85 with a negative fecal occult blood test 1 year ago (N = 118,269) was 0.23% [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.20%-0.26%] after 2 years and 1.21% (95% CI, 1.13%-1.30%) after 8 years. Cumulative colorectal cancer mortality was 0.03% (95% CI, 0.02%-0.04%) after 2 years and 0.33% (95% CI, 0.28%-0.39%) after 8 years. Cumulative risk of death from non-colorectal cancer causes was 4.81% (95% CI, 4.68%-4.96%) after 2 years and 28.40% (95% CI, 27.95%-28.85%) after 8 years., Conclusions: Among 76- to 85-year-olds with a recent negative stool-based test, cumulative colorectal cancer incidence and mortality estimates were low, especially within 2 years; death from other causes was over 100 times more likely than death from colorectal cancer., Impact: These findings of low absolute colorectal cancer risk, and comparatively higher risk of death from other causes, can inform decision-making regarding whether and when to continue colorectal cancer screening beyond age 75 among screen-eligible adults., (©2023 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: Lung cancer screening (LCS) guidelines in the United States recommend LCS for those age 50-80 years with at least 20 pack-years smoking history who currently smoke or quit within the last 15 years. We tested the performance of simple smoking-related criteria derived from electronic health record (EHR) data and developed and tested the performance of a multivariable model in predicting LCS eligibility., Methods: Analyses were completed within the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Consortium (PROSPR-Lung). In our primary validity analyses, the reference standard LCS eligibility was based on self-reported smoking data collected via survey. Within one PROSPR-Lung health system, we used a training data set and penalized multivariable logistic regression using the Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator to select EHR-based variables into the prediction model including demographics, smoking history, diagnoses, and prescription medications. A separate test data set assessed model performance. We also conducted external validation analysis in a separate health system and reported AUC, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy metrics associated with the Youden Index., Results: There were 14,214 individuals with survey data to assess LCS eligibility in primary analyses. The overall performance for assigning LCS eligibility status as measured by the AUC values at the two health systems was 0.940 and 0.938. At the Youden Index cutoff value, performance metrics were as follows: accuracy, 0.855 and 0.895; sensitivity, 0.886 and 0.920; specificity, 0.896 and 0.850; PPV, 0.357 and 0.444; and NPV, 0.988 and 0.992., Conclusion: Our results suggest that health systems can use an EHR-derived multivariable prediction model to aid in the identification of those who may be eligible for LCS.

Background: Declines in the prevalence of cigarette smoking, advances in targeted therapies, and implementation of lung cancer screening have changed the clinical landscape for lung cancer. The proportion of lung cancer deaths is increasing in those who have never smoked cigarettes. To better understand contemporary patterns in survival among patients with lung cancer, a comprehensive evaluation of factors associated with survival, including differential associations by smoking status, is needed., Methods: Patients diagnosed with lung cancer between January 1, 2010, and September 30, 2019, were identified. We estimated all-cause and lung cancer-specific median, 5-year, and multivariable restricted mean survival time (RMST) to identify demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical factors associated with survival, overall and stratified by smoking status (never, former, and current)., Results: Analyses included 6813 patients with lung cancer: 13.9% never smoked, 54.2% formerly smoked, and 31.9% currently smoked. All-cause RMST through 5 years for those who never, formerly, and currently smoked was 32.1, 25.9, and 23.3 months, respectively. Lung cancer-specific RMST was 36.3 months, 30.3 months, and 26.0 months, respectively. Across most models, female sex, younger age, higher socioeconomic measures, first-course surgery, histology, and body mass index were positively associated, and higher stage was inversely associated with survival. Relative to White patients, Black patients had increased survival among those who formerly smoked., Conclusions: We identify actionable factors associated with survival between those who never, formerly, and currently smoked cigarettes. These findings illuminate opportunities to address underlying mechanisms driving lung cancer progression, including use of first-course treatment, and enhanced implementation of tailored smoking cessation interventions for individuals diagnosed with cancer., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Authors aimed to calculate the percentage up-to-date with testing in the context of lung cancer screening across 5 healthcare systems and evaluate differences according to patient and health system characteristics., Methods: Lung cancer screening‒eligible individuals receiving care within the five systems in the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung consortium from October 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019 were included in analyses. Data collection was completed on June 15, 2021; final analyses were completed on April 1, 2022. Chest computed tomography scans and patient characteristics were obtained through electronic health records and used to calculate the percentage completing a chest computed tomography scan in the previous 12 months (considered up-to-date). The association of patient and healthcare system factors with being up-to-date was evaluated with adjusted prevalence ratios and 95% CIs using log-binomial regression models., Results: There were 29,417 individuals eligible for lung cancer screening as of September 30, 2019; 8,333 (28.3%) were up-to-date with testing. Those aged 65-74 years (prevalence ratio=1.19; CI=1.15, 1.24, versus ages 55-64), those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (prevalence ratio=2.05; CI=1.98, 2.13), and those in higher SES census tracts (prevalence ratio=1.22; CI=1.16, 1.30, highest quintile versus lowest) were more likely to be up-to-date. Currently smoking (prevalence ratio=0.91; CI=0.88, 0.95), having a BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 (prevalence ratio=0.83; CI=0.77, 0.88), identifying as Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (prevalence ratio=0.79; CI=0.68, 0.92), and having a decentralized lung cancer screening program (prevalence ratio=0.77; CI=0.74, 0.80) were inversely associated with being up-to-date., Conclusions: The percentage up-to-date with testing among those eligible for lung cancer screening is well below up-to-date estimates for other types of cancer screening, and disparities in lung cancer screening participation remain., (Copyright © 2023 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identifying key determinants is crucial for improving program implementation and achieving long-term sustainment within healthcare organizations. Organizational-level complexity and heterogeneity across multiple stakeholders can complicate our understanding of program implementation. We describe two data visualization methods used to operationalize implementation success and to consolidate and select implementation factors for further analysis., Methods: We used a combination of process mapping and matrix heat mapping to systematically synthesize and visualize qualitative data from 66 stakeholder interviews across nine healthcare organizations, to characterize universal tumor screening programs of all newly diagnosed colorectal and endometrial cancers and understand the influence of contextual factors on implementation. We constructed visual representations of protocols to compare processes and score process optimization components. We also used color-coded matrices to systematically code, summarize, and consolidate contextual data using factors from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Combined scores were visualized in a final data matrix heat map., Results: Nineteen process maps were created to visually represent each protocol. Process maps identified the following gaps and inefficiencies: inconsistent execution of the protocol, no routine reflex testing, inconsistent referrals after a positive screen, no evidence of data tracking, and a lack of quality assurance measures. These barriers in patient care helped us define five process optimization components and used these to quantify program optimization on a scale from 0 (no program) to 5 (optimized), representing the degree to which a program is implemented and optimally maintained. Combined scores within the final data matrix heat map revealed patterns of contextual factors across optimized programs, non-optimized programs, and organizations with no program., Conclusions: Process mapping provided an efficient method to visually compare processes including patient flow, provider interactions, and process gaps and inefficiencies across sites, thereby measuring implementation success via optimization scores. Matrix heat mapping proved useful for data visualization and consolidation, resulting in a summary matrix for cross-site comparisons and selection of relevant CFIR factors. Combining these tools enabled a systematic and transparent approach to understanding complex organizational heterogeneity prior to formal coincidence analysis, introducing a stepwise approach to data consolidation and factor selection., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Purpose: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and its economic consequences may disproportionately impact cancer survivors and their overall health-related quality of life. The objective of this study was to examine whether cancer survivors experienced higher levels of financial strain or food insecurity compared to those without a history of cancer., Methods: Kaiser Permanente Research Bank (KPRB) study participants were invited to complete a series of electronic surveys starting April 2020 to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants who completed the initial survey and one follow-up survey were included. The odds of financial strain and food insecurity in those with and without a history of cancer were estimated using multinomial logistic regression., Results: Cancer survivors (n = 16,231) had lower odds of reporting "somewhat hard" (AOR = 0.77) and "very hard" (AOR = 0.67) financial strain, and food insecurity "sometimes" (AOR = 0.70) and "often" (AOR = 0.55) compared to those with no history of cancer (n = 88,409). Non-Hispanic (NH) Black and Hispanic cancer survivors had higher odds compared to NH Whites of reporting financial strain and food insecurity. Smokers and those with multiple comorbidities had higher odds of reporting financial strain and food insecurity among cancer survivors., Conclusions: While cancer survivors overall did not report greater financial strain or food insecurity than individuals without a history of cancer, subsets of cancer survivors are experiencing greater social risks during the pandemic and should be prioritized for screening for social risk factors., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Incorporating screening for social risk factors into care coordination workflows for subsets of cancer survivors should be a priority., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Introduction: Our primary purpose is to understand comorbidities and health outcomes associated with electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) use., Methods: Study participants were Kaiser Permanente (KP) members from eight US regions who joined the Kaiser Permanente Research Bank (KPRB) from September 2015 through December 2019 and completed a questionnaire assessing demographic and behavioral factors, including ENDS and traditional cigarette use. Medical history and health outcomes were obtained from electronic health records. We used multinomial logistic regression to estimate odd ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of current and former ENDS use according to member characteristics, behavioral factors, and clinical history. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs comparing risk of health outcomes according to ENDS use., Results: Of 119 593 participants, 1594 (1%) reported current ENDS use and 5603 (5%) reported past ENDS use. ENDS users were more likely to be younger, male, gay or lesbian, and American Indian / Alaskan Native or Asian. After adjustment for confounding, current ENDS use was associated with current traditional cigarette use (OR = 39.55; CI:33.44-46.77), current marijuana use (OR = 6.72; CI:5.61-8.05), history of lung cancer (OR = 2.64; CI:1.42-4.92), non-stroke cerebral vascular disease (OR = 1.55; CI:1.21-1.99), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR = 2.16; CI:1.77-2.63). Current ENDS use was also associated with increased risk of emergency room (ER) visits (HR = 1.17; CI: 1.05-1.30) and death (HR = 1.84; CI:1.02-3.32)., Conclusions: Concurrent traditional cigarette use, marijuana use, and comorbidities were prevalent among those who used ENDS, and current ENDS use was associated with an increased risk of ER visits and death. Additional research focused on health risks associated with concurrent ENDS and traditional cigarette use in those with underlying comorbidities is needed., Competing Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2023.)

Introduction/background: Systemic treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is shifting from platinum-based chemotherapy to immunotherapy and targeted therapies associated with improved survival in clinical trials. As new therapies are approved for use, examining variations in use for treating patients in community practice can generate additional evidence as to the magnitude of their benefit., Patients and Methods: We identified 1,442 patients diagnosed with de novo stage IV NSCLC between 3/1/2012 and 12/31/2020. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns are described overall and by type of first- and second-line systemic therapy received. Prevalence ratios estimate the association of patient and tumor characteristics with receipt of first-line therapy., Results: Within 180 days of diagnosis, 949 (66%) patients received first-line systemic therapy, increasing from 53% in 2012 to 71% in 2020 (p = 0.0004). The proportion of patients receiving first-line immunotherapy+/-chemotherapy (IMO) increased from 14%-66% (p<0.0001). Overall, 380 (26%) patients received both first- and second-line treatment, varying by year between 16%-36% (p = 0.18). The proportion of patients receiving second-line IMO increased from 13%-37% (p<0.0001). Older age and current smoking status were inversely associated with receipt of first-line therapy. Higher BMI, receipt of radiation, and diagnosis year were positively associated with receipt of first-line therapy. No association was found for race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status., Conclusion: The proportion of advanced NSCLC patients receiving first- and second-line treatment increased over time, particularly for IMO treatments. Additional research is needed to better understand the impact of these therapies on patient outcomes, including short-term, long-term, and financial toxicities., Microabstract: Systemic treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is shifting from platinum-based therapies to immunotherapy and targeted therapies. Using de novo stage IV NSCLC patients identified from 4 healthcare systems, we examine trends in systemic therapy. We saw an increase in the portion of patients receiving any systemic therapy and a sharp increase in the proportion of patients receiving immunotherapy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest NMC and DPR report research support from Pfizer paid to their institution, outside of the submitted work. KAR reports research support from Pfizer and AstraZeneca paid to her institution and personal fees as a scientific advisor to Merck, all outside of the submitted work. ABH reports research support from Biodesix, paid to her institution outside of the submitted work. AV reports personal fees as a scientific advisor to the Lung Cancer Initiative at Johnson & Johnson and grants to his institution from MagArray, Inc., Broncus Medical, Inc., and Precyte, Inc. outside of the submitted work. AV is an advisory board member of the Lungevity Foundation (unpaid). CND reports research support from Genentech paid to her institution, outside of the submitted work. All other authors reported no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

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., (Copyright © 2022 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cancer screening should be recommended only when the balance between benefits and harms is favorable. This review evaluated how U.S. cancer screening guidelines reported harms, within and across organ-specific processes to screen for cancer., Objective: To describe current reporting practices and identify opportunities for improvement., Design: Review of guidelines., Setting: United States., Patients: Patients eligible for screening for breast, cervical, colorectal, lung, or prostate cancer according to U.S. guidelines., Measurements: Information was abstracted on reporting of patient-level harms associated with screening, diagnostic follow-up, and treatment. The authors classified harms reporting as not mentioned, conceptual, qualitative, or quantitative and noted whether literature was cited when harms were described. Frequency of harms reporting was summarized by organ type., Results: Harms reporting was inconsistent across organ types and at each step of the cancer screening process. Guidelines did not report all harms for any specific organ type or for any category of harm across organ types. The most complete harms reporting was for prostate cancer screening guidelines and the least complete for colorectal cancer screening guidelines. Conceptualization of harms and use of quantitative evidence also differed by organ type., Limitations: This review considers only patient-level harms. The authors did not verify accuracy of harms information presented in the guidelines., Conclusion: The review identified opportunities for improving conceptualization, assessment, and reporting of screening process-related harms in guidelines. Future work should consider nuances associated with each organ-specific process to screen for cancer, including which harms are most salient and where evidence gaps exist, and explicitly explore how to optimally weigh available evidence in determining net screening benefit. Improved harms reporting could aid informed decision making, ultimately improving cancer screening delivery., Primary Funding Source: National Cancer Institute.

Aim: International studies have shown that most colon cancers are diagnosed among people with symptoms, but research is limited in the United States. Here, we conducted a retrospective study of adults aged 50-85 years diagnosed with stage I-IIIA colon cancer between 1995 and 2014 in two US healthcare systems., Methods: Mode of detection (screening or symptomatic) was ascertained from medical records. We estimated unadjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing detection mode by patient factors at diagnosis (year, age, sex, race, smoking status, body mass index [BMI], Charlson score), prediagnostic primary care utilization, and tumour characteristics (stage, location)., Results: Of 1,675 people with colon cancer, 38.4% were screen-detected, while 61.6% were diagnosed following symptomatic presentation. Screen-detected cancer was more common among those diagnosed between 2010 and 2014 versus 1995-1999 (OR 1.65, 95% CI: 1.19-2.28), and those with a BMI of 25-<30 kg/m 2 (OR 1.54, 95% CI: 1.21-1.98) or ≥30 kg/m 2 (OR 1.52, 95% CI: 1.18-1.96) versus <25 kg/m 2 . Screen-detected cancer was less common among people aged 76-85 (OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.39-0.65) versus 50-64, those with comorbidity scores >0 (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.91 for score = 1, OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.26-0.45 for score = 2+), and those with 2+ prediagnostic primary care visits (OR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.76) versus 0 visits. The odds of screen detection were lower among patients diagnosed with stage IIA (OR 0.33, 95% CI = 0.27-0.41) or IIB (OR 0.12, 95% CI: 0.06-0.24) cancers versus stage I., Conclusions: Most colon cancers among screen-eligible adults were diagnosed following symptomatic presentation. Even with increasing screening rates over time, research is needed to better understand why specific groups are more likely to be diagnosed when symptomatic and identify opportunities for interventions., (© 2022 Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Rationale: Black patients receive recommended lung cancer screening (LCS) follow-up care less frequently than White patients, but it is unknown if this racial disparity persists across both decentralized and centralized LCS programs. Objectives: To determine adherence to American College of Radiology Lung Imaging Reporting and Data System (Lung-RADS) recommendations among individuals undergoing LCS at either decentralized or centralized programs and to evaluate the association of race with LCS adherence. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study of patients receiving LCS at five heterogeneous U.S. healthcare systems. We calculated adherence to annual LCS among patients with a negative baseline screen (Lung-RADS 1 or 2) and recommended follow-up care among those with a positive baseline screen (Lung-RADS 3, 4A, 4B, or 4X) stratified by type of LCS program and evaluated the association between race and adherence using multivariable modified Poisson regression. Results: Of the 6,134 total individuals receiving LCS, 5,142 (83.8%) had negative baseline screens, and 992 (16.2%) had positive baseline screens. Adherence to both annual LCS (34.8% vs. 76.1%; P  < 0.001) and recommended follow-up care (63.9% vs. 74.6%; P  < 0.001) was lower at decentralized compared with centralized programs. Among individuals with negative baseline screens, a racial disparity in adherence was observed only at decentralized screening programs (interaction term, P  < 0.001). At decentralized programs, Black race was associated with 27% reduced adherence to annual LCS (adjusted relative risk [aRR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-0.84), whereas at centralized programs, no effect by race was observed (aRR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.91-1.05). In contrast, among those with positive baseline screens, there was no significant difference by race for adherence to recommended follow-up care by type of LCS program (decentralized aRR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.81-1.11; centralized aRR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71-0.93; interaction term, P  = 0.176). Conclusions: In this large multicenter study of individuals screened for lung cancer, adherence to both annual LCS and recommended follow-up care was greater at centralized screening programs. Black patients were less likely to receive annual LCS than White patients at decentralized compared with centralized LCS programs. Our results highlight the need for further study of healthcare system-level mechanisms to optimize longitudinal LCS care.

The effectiveness and efficiency of cancer screening in real-world settings depend on many factors, including test sensitivity and specificity. Outside of select experimental studies, not everyone receives a gold standard test that can serve as a comparator in estimating screening test accuracy. Thus, many studies of screening test accuracy use the passage of time to infer whether or not cancer was present at the time of the screening test, particularly for patients with a negative screening test. We define the accuracy assessment interval as the period of time after a screening test that is used to estimate the test's accuracy. We describe how the length of this interval may bias sensitivity and specificity estimates. We call for future research to quantify bias and uncertainty in accuracy estimates and to provide guidance on setting accuracy assessment interval lengths for different cancers and screening modalities., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Cancer screening is a complex process involving multiple steps and levels of influence (e.g., patient, provider, facility, health care system, community, or neighborhood). We describe the design, methods, and research agenda of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR II) consortium. PROSPR II Research Centers (PRC), and the Coordinating Center aim to identify opportunities to improve screening processes and reduce disparities through investigation of factors affecting cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening in U.S. community health care settings., Methods: We collected multilevel, longitudinal cervical, colorectal, and lung cancer screening process data from clinical and administrative sources on &gt;9 million racially and ethnically diverse individuals across 10 heterogeneous health care systems with cohorts beginning January 1, 2010. To facilitate comparisons across organ types and highlight data breadth, we calculated frequencies of multilevel characteristics and volumes of screening and diagnostic tests/procedures and abnormalities., Results: Variations in patient, provider, and facility characteristics reflected the PROSPR II health care systems and differing target populations. PRCs identified incident diagnoses of invasive cancers, in situ cancers, and precancers (invasive: 372 cervical, 24,131 colorectal, 11,205 lung; in situ: 911 colorectal, 32 lung; precancers: 13,838 cervical, 554,499 colorectal)., Conclusions: PROSPR II's research agenda aims to advance: (i) conceptualization and measurement of the cancer screening process, its multilevel factors, and quality; (ii) knowledge of cancer disparities; and (iii) evaluation of the COVID-19 pandemic's initial impacts on cancer screening. We invite researchers to collaborate with PROSPR II investigators., Impact: PROSPR II is a valuable data resource for cancer screening researchers., (©2022 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Broad participation in genetic research is needed to promote equitable advances in disease treatment and prevention., Objectives: The objective of the study was to assess motivations for, and concerns about, genetic research participation., Methods: The Genetics in Research and Health Care Survey was sent in winter 2017-2018 to 57,331 adult Kaiser Permanente (KP) members from 7 US regions to assess attitudes about genetic testing in health care and research. The survey included an open-ended question on why members would or would not participate in genetic research. Open text responses to this question were coded in the qualitative analysis software Dedoose and analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. Code summaries were organized by major themes, subthemes, and exemplary quotes., Results: Of the 10,369 participants who completed the survey, 2,645 (25%) provided a comment describing reasons they would or would not participate in research involving genetic testing. Respondents who provided a text comment were 64% female, 49% non-Hispanic (NH) White, 17% Asian/Pacific Islander, 20% Hispanic, and 14% NH Black. The primary themes identified were (1) altruism; (2) decision-making and planning; (3) data use; and (4) data security. These major themes were consistent across each race and ethnic group., Conclusions: To promote broad participation in genetic research, it is important that recruitment materials address the primary motivators for genetic research participation, including altruism and the potential use of results for personal decision-making. Study materials should also address concerns about possible misuse of genetic information and fears over potential data breaches., (© 2022 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Although combustible cigarette use is an established risk factor for severe COVID-19 disease, there is conflicting evidence for the association of electronic cigarette use with SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease severity., Methods: Study participants were from the Kaiser Permanente Research Bank (KPRB), a biorepository that includes adult Kaiser Permanente members from across the United States. Starting in April 2020, electronic surveys were sent to KPRB members to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. These surveys collected information on self-report of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-related risk factors, including electronic cigarette and combustible cigarette smoking history. We also used electronic health records data to assess COVID-19 diagnoses, positive PCR lab tests, hospitalizations, and death. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection between individuals by e-cigarette use categories (never, former, and current). Among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection, we used multivariable logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs comparing the odds of hospitalization or death within 30 days of infection between individuals by e-cigarette use categories., Results: There were 126,475 individuals who responded to the survey and completed questions on e-cigarette and combustible cigarette use (48% response rate). Among survey respondents, 819 (1%) currently used e-cigarettes, 3,691 (3%) formerly used e-cigarettes, and 121,965 (96%) had never used e-cigarettes. After adjustment for demographic, behavioral, and clinical factors, there was no association with SARS-CoV-2 infection and former e-cigarette use (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.99; CI: 0.83-1.18) or current e-cigarette use (HR = 1.08; CI: 0.76-1.52). Among those with SARS-CoV-2 infection, there was no association with hospitalization or death within 30 days of infection and former e-cigarette use (odds ratio (OR) = 1.19; CI: 0.59-2.43) or current e-cigarette use (OR = 1.02; CI: 0.22-4.74)., Conclusions: Our results suggest that e-cigarette use is not associated with an increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection or severe COVID-19 illness., Competing Interests: DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Rationale: Lung-RADS classification was developed to standardize reporting and management of lung cancer screening using low-dose computed tomographic (LDCT) imaging. Although variation in Lung-RADS distribution between healthcare systems has been reported, it is unclear if this is explained by patient characteristics, radiologist experience with lung cancer screening, or other factors. Objectives: Our objective was to determine if patient or radiologist factors are associated with Lung-RADS score. Methods: In the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process (PROSPR) Lung consortium, we conducted a study of patients who received their first screening LDCT imaging at one of the five healthcare systems in the PROSPR Lung Research Center from May 1, 2014, through December 31, 2017. Data on LDCT scans, patient factors, and radiologist characteristics were obtained via electronic health records. LDCT scan findings were categorized using Lung-RADS (negative [1], benign [2], probably benign [3], or suspicious [4]). We used generalized estimating equations with a multinomial distribution to compare the odds of Lung-RADS 3, and separately Lung-RADS 4, versus Lung-RADS 1 or 2 and estimated adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the associations between Lung-RADS assignment and patient and radiologist characteristics. Results: Analyses included 8,556 patients; 24% were assigned Lung-RADS 1, 60% Lung-RADS 2, 10% Lung-RADS 3, and 5% Lung-RADS 4. Age was positively associated with Lung-RADS 3 (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03) and 4 (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) was positively associated with Lung-RADS 4 (OR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.45-2.20); obesity was inversely associated with Lung-RADS 3 (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.58-0.84) and 4 (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.75). There was no association between sex, race, ethnicity, education, or smoking status and Lung-RADS assignment. Radiologist volume of interpreting screening LDCT scans, years in practice, and thoracic specialty were also not associated with Lung-RADS assignment. Conclusions: Healthcare systems that are comprised of patients with an older age distribution or higher levels of COPD will have a greater proportion of screening LDCT scans with Lung-RADS 3 or 4 findings and should plan for additional resources to support appropriate and timely management of noted positive findings.

Background: The Kaiser Permanente Research Bank (KPRB) is collecting biospecimens and surveys linked to electronic health records (EHR) from approximately 400,000 adult KP members. Within the KPRB, we developed a Cancer Cohort to address issues related to cancer survival, and to understand how genetic, lifestyle and environmental factors impact cancer treatment, treatment sequelae, and prognosis. We describe the Cancer Cohort design and implementation, describe cohort characteristics after 5 years of enrollment, and discuss future directions., Methods: Cancer cases are identified using rapid case ascertainment algorithms, linkage to regional or central tumor registries, and direct outreach to KP members with a history of cancer. Enrollment is primarily through email invitation. Participants complete a consent form, survey, and donate a blood or saliva sample. All cancer types are included., Results: As of December 31, 2020, the cohort included 65,225 cases (56% female, 44% male) verified in tumor registries. The largest group was diagnosed between 60 and 69 years of age (31%) and are non-Hispanic White (83%); however, 10,076 (16%) were diagnosed at ages 18-49 years, 4208 (7%) are Hispanic, 3393 (5%) are Asian, and 2389 (4%) are Black. The median survival time is 14 years. Biospecimens are available on 98% of the cohort., Conclusions: The KPRB Cancer Cohort is designed to improve our understanding of treatment efficacy and factors that contribute to long-term cancer survival. The cohort's diversity - with respect to age, race/ethnicity and geographic location - will facilitate research on factors that contribute to cancer survival disparities., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: To evaluate whether limited participation in life activities is associated with quality of life (QOL) in rectal cancer survivors, and if so, whether this association is independent of bowel function difficulties., Methods: We surveyed rectal cancer survivors from four healthcare systems about their QOL, bowel function, and participation in life activities. Additional demographic and clinical variables were extracted from the electronic health record. We examined independent associations between bowel function, participation in life activities, and QOL, controlling for potential confounders. We also identified factors, including ostomy status, that correlate with participation in life activities., Results: Of the 527 respondents, 52% were male, 80% were non-Hispanic white, and the mean age was 63. In fully adjusted models for all rectal cancer survivors, participation in life activities was positively associated with QOL, while bowel function was not. Bowel function retained an independent association with QOL for those who previously had an ostomy and were therefore more likely to have a low rectal anastomosis. Lower participation in life activities was correlated with lower self-reported physical and cognitive function, younger age, financial difficulty, and being non-Hispanic white., Conclusions: Rectal cancer survivors' participation in life activities was strongly associated with QOL, even when controlling for numerous confounders, including bowel function. Identifying ways to improve participation in life activities may be critical to developing rehabilitative and other supportive interventions that optimize QOL among rectal cancer survivors., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Purpose: This study aimed to characterize patient and clinical factors associated with cannabis (marijuana) use among patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC)., Methods: We identified CRC patients, diagnosed from 2016 to 2018, using the Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry. CRC patients were recruited via mail and telephone, and participants completed a questionnaire eliciting information on medical history, demographics, and lifestyle factors, including cannabis use. Cancer stage was obtained from SEER registry data., Results: Of 1,433 survey respondents, 339 (24%) were current cannabis users. Current cannabis use was associated with younger age at diagnosis, lower BMI, and a higher prevalence of cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption (p-value < 0.05). Cannabis use was also associated with lower quality of life scores (FACT-C) and advanced-stage cancer (p-value < 0.05)., Conclusion: Cannabis use among CRC patients was common. Patients with more advanced disease were more likely to report cannabis use. Use also varied by some personal factors, consistent with patterns in the general population. Given the high prevalence of cannabis use among CRC patients, research is needed to determine the benefits and harms of cannabis use for symptom management in cancer patients., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG.)

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released updated lung cancer screening recommendations in 2021, lowering the screening age from 55 to 50 years and smoking history from 30 to 20 pack-years. These changes are expected to expand screening access to women and racial and ethnic minority groups., Objective: To estimate the population-level changes associated with the 2021 USPSTF expansion of lung cancer screening eligibility by sex, race and ethnicity, sociodemographic factors, and comorbidities in 5 community-based health care systems., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study analyzed data of patients who received care from any of 5 community-based health care systems (which are members of the Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening Process Lung Consortium, a collaboration that conducts research to better understand how to improve the cancer screening processes in community health care settings) from January 1, 2010, through September 30, 2019. Individuals who had complete smoking history and were engaged with the health care system for 12 or more continuous months were included. Those who had never smoked or who had unknown smoking history were excluded., Exposures: Electronic health record-derived age, sex, race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), comorbidities, and smoking history., Main Outcomes and Measures: Differences in the proportion of the newly eligible population by age, sex, race and ethnicity, Charlson Comorbidity Index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis, and SES as well as lung cancer diagnoses under the 2013 recommendations vs the expected cases under the 2021 recommendations were evaluated using χ2 tests., Results: As of September 2019, there were 341 163 individuals aged 50 to 80 years who currently or previously smoked. Among these, 34 528 had electronic health record data that captured pack-year and quit-date information and were eligible for lung cancer screening according to the 2013 USPSTF recommendations. The 2021 USPSTF recommendations expanded screening eligibility to 18 533 individuals, representing a 53.7% increase. Compared with the 2013 cohort, the newly eligible 2021 population included 5833 individuals (31.5%) aged 50 to 54 years, a larger proportion of women (52.0% [n = 9631]), and more racial or ethnic minority groups. The relative increases in the proportion of newly eligible individuals were 60.6% for Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander; 67.4% for Hispanic; 69.7% for non-Hispanic Black; and 49.0% for non-Hispanic White groups. The relative increase for women was 13.8% higher than for men (61.2% vs 47.4%), and those with a lower comorbidity burden and lower SES had higher relative increases (eg, 68.7% for a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 0; 61.1% for lowest SES). The 2021 recommendations were associated with an estimated 30% increase in incident lung cancer diagnoses compared with the 2013 recommendations., Conclusions and Relevance: This cohort study suggests that, in diverse health care systems, adopting the 2021 USPSTF recommendations will increase the number of women, racial and ethnic minority groups, and individuals with lower SES who are eligible for lung cancer screening, thus helping to minimize the barriers to screening access for individuals with high risk for lung cancer.

Purpose: Sleep quality in relation to anatomic site among colorectal cancer (CRC) patients is not well understood, though discerning the relationship could contribute to improved survivorship care., Methods: We ascertained sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index) and other personal characteristics within an ongoing population-based study of CRC patients identified through a cancer registry ( N = 1453). Differences in sleep quality by CRC site were analyzed using chi-square and ANOVA tests. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association of tumor site with sleep quality concerns, adjusting for patient attributes and time since diagnosis., Results: Sleeping problems were reported by 70% of CRC patients. Overall, participants with rectal (vs. colon) cancer were more likely (OR (95% CI)) to report general trouble sleeping (1.58 (1.19, 2.10)). Rectal cancer patients were also more likely than colon cancer patients to report changes in sleep patterns after cancer diagnosis (1.38 (1.05, 1.80)), and trouble sleeping specifically due to getting up to use the bathroom (1.53 (1.20, 1.96)) or pain (1.58 (1.15, 2.17)), but were less likely to report trouble sleeping specifically due to issues with breathing/coughing/snoring (0.51 (0.27, 0.99))., Conclusion: Overall, rectal cancer patients were more likely to have sleep complications compared to colon cancer patients. This suggests sleep-focused survivorship care may be adapted according to CRC site to ensure patients receive appropriate support.

Rising trends in the incidence and mortality of early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) in those who are younger than 50 years have been well established. These trends have spurred intense investigation focused on elucidating the epidemiology and characteristics of early-onset CRC, as well as on identifying strategies for early detection and prevention. In this review, we provide a contemporary update on early-onset CRC with a particular focus on epidemiology, molecular characterization, red flag signs and symptoms, and screening for early-onset CRC., (Copyright © 2021 AGA Institute. All rights reserved.)

Genetic testing has increased over the last decade due to growth in the number of clinical and direct-to-consumer (DTC) tests. However, there is uncertainty about how increased DTC genetic testing affects disparities. Between November 2017 and February 2018, a nationwide electronic survey on experiences with genetic testing was conducted among adult Kaiser Permanente members. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals comparing receipt of clinical and DTC genetic testing between groups by race and ethnicity. Invitations were sent to 57,331 members, and 10,369 surveys were completed. 22% of respondents had received genetic testing (17% DTC and 5% provider-ordered). Non-Hispanic Whites were more likely than other groups to have clinical genetic testing but were similar to Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks in rates of DTC genetic testing. Among those who received any health-related genetic test, 10% reported abnormal results. Of these, non-Hispanic Whites were more likely than other racial/ethnic groups to speak to a medical professional about abnormal results. Results suggest that racial/ethnic disparities in the use of clinical genetic services persist. Additional research is needed to identify lessons learned from DTC genetic testing that may increase equity in the use of clinical genetic services., (© 2019 National Society of Genetic Counselors.)

Purpose: BRAF mutation and DNA hypermethylation have linked sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps) to serrated colorectal cancer (CRC) in cross-sectional studies, but they have not been evaluated in a longitudinal study. We aimed to evaluate the associations between molecular markers of serrated polyps and subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia., Methods: Study subjects included Kaiser Permanente Washington members aged 20-75 years who received an index colonoscopy between 1/1/1998 and 12/31/2007 and had hyperplastic polyps (HPs) or SSA/Ps according to study pathology review. Polyps from index colonoscopies were removed and assayed for BRAF mutation, CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), and MLH1 methylation. Pathology reports and biopsies from the subsequent lower gastrointestinal endoscopy through 1/1/2013 were reviewed for advanced colorectal neoplasia. We identified additional incident CRC cases through linkage to the Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results registry. We used generalized estimating equations to calculate adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia, comparing index serrated polyps with different molecular markers., Results: We included 553 individuals with index serrated polyps (420 HPs and 133 SSA/Ps) and 795 subsequent endoscopies. The prevalence of BRAF-mutant, CIMP-high, and MLH1-methylated serrated polyps were 51%, 4%, and 2%, respectively. BRAF and CIMP were not associated with subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia. MLH1-methylated SSP/As were significantly more likely to have subsequent advanced neoplasia (OR = 4.66, 95% CI 1.06-20.51)., Conclusion: Our results suggest that BRAF-mutant and CIMP-high serrated polyps are not associated with subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia. Among SSA/Ps, MLH1 methylation may be an important marker to identify high-risk CRC precursors.

Background: As more states legalize cannabis for medical and recreational use, people increasingly use cannabis to treat medical conditions and associated symptoms. The prevalence and utility of cannabis for cancer-related symptoms may be clarified by examining cannabis use among patients with a common cancer diagnosis. We aimed to determine the prevalence of cannabis use among colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors and its associations with quality of life (QoL) and cancer-related symptomatology., Methods: A cross-sectional survey of patient-reported QoL outcomes and behaviors, including cannabis use, was conducted within the Patient Outcomes To Advance Learning network's (PORTAL) CRC Cohort. The cohort included a population-based sample of healthcare system members ≥18 years old diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum from 2010 through 2016. We assessed the association between cannabis use and QoL using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 summary score., Results: Of the 1784 respondents, 293 (16.4%) reported cannabis use following CRC diagnosis. Current tobacco smokers were more likely to use cannabis compared to former or never tobacco smokers (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 2.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.56 to 4.70). Greater alcohol use (> 4 drinks per month versus ≤4 drinks per month) was associated with cannabis use (aOR 2.17, 95% CI 1.65 to 2.85). There was an association between cannabis use and cancer stage at diagnosis, with stage 3 or 4 CRC patients more likely to use cannabis than stage 1 or 2 CRC patients (aOR 1.68, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.25). After adjusting for demographics, medical comorbidities, stage and site of CRC diagnosis, and prescription opioid use, people who used cannabis had significantly lower QoL than people who did not use cannabis (difference of - 6.14, 95% CI - 8.07 to - 4.20)., Conclusion: Among CRC survivors, cannabis use was relatively common, associated with more advanced stages of disease, associated with tobacco and alcohol use, and not associated with better QoL. Clinicians should inquire about cannabis use among their patients and provide evidence-based recommendations for cancer-related symptoms.

Background: Lung cancer screening (LCS) requires complex processes to identify eligible patients, provide appropriate follow-up, and manage findings. It is unclear whether LCS in real-world clinical settings will realize the same benefits as the National Lung Screening Trial (NLST)., Objective: To evaluate the impact of process modifications on compliance with LCS guidelines during LCS program implementation, and to compare patient characteristics and outcomes with those in NLST., Design: Retrospective cohort study., Setting: Kaiser Permanente Colorado (KPCO), a non-profit integrated healthcare system., Patients: A total of 3375 patients who underwent a baseline lung cancer screening low-dose computed tomography (S-LDCT) scan between May 2014 and June 2017., Measurements: Among those receiving an S-LDCT, proportion who met guidelines-based LCS eligibility criteria before and after LCS process modifications, differences in patient characteristics and outcomes between KPCO LCS patients and the NLST cohort, and factors associated with a positive screen., Results: After modifying LCS eligibility confirmation processes, patients receiving S-LDCT who met guidelines-based LCS eligibility criteria increased from 45.6 to 92.7% (P < 0.001). Prior to changes, patients were older (68 vs. 67 years; P = 0.001), less likely to be current smokers (51.3% vs. 52.5%; P < 0.001), and less likely to have a ≥ 30-pack-year smoking history (50.0% vs. 95.3%; P < 0.001). Compared with NLST participants, KPCO LCS patients were older (67 vs. 60 years; P < 0.001), more likely to currently smoke (52.3% vs. 48.1%; P < 0.001), and more likely to have pulmonary disease. Among those with a positive baseline S-LDCT, the lung cancer detection rate was higher at KPCO (9.4% vs. 3.8%; P < 0.001) and was positively associated with prior pulmonary disease., Conclusion: Adherence to LCS guidelines requires eligibility confirmation procedures. Among those with a positive baseline S-LDCT, comorbidity burden and lung cancer detection rates were notably higher than in NLST, suggesting that the study of long-term outcomes in patients undergoing LCS in real-world clinical settings is warranted.

Background & Aims: Early-onset colorectal cancer (CRC, in persons younger than 50 years old) is increasing in incidence; yet, in the absence of a family history of CRC, this population lacks harmonized recommendations for prevention. We aimed to determine whether a polygenic risk score (PRS) developed from 95 CRC-associated common genetic risk variants was associated with risk for early-onset CRC., Methods: We studied risk for CRC associated with a weighted PRS in 12,197 participants younger than 50 years old vs 95,865 participants 50 years or older. PRS was calculated based on single nucleotide polymorphisms associated with CRC in a large-scale genome-wide association study as of January 2019. Participants were pooled from 3 large consortia that provided clinical and genotyping data: the Colon Cancer Family Registry, the Colorectal Transdisciplinary Study, and the Genetics and Epidemiology of Colorectal Cancer Consortium and were all of genetically defined European descent. Findings were replicated in an independent cohort of 72,573 participants., Results: Overall associations with CRC per standard deviation of PRS were significant for early-onset cancer, and were stronger compared with late-onset cancer (P for interaction = .01); when we compared the highest PRS quartile with the lowest, risk increased 3.7-fold for early-onset CRC (95% CI 3.28-4.24) vs 2.9-fold for late-onset CRC (95% CI 2.80-3.04). This association was strongest for participants without a first-degree family history of CRC (P for interaction = 5.61 × 10 -5 ). When we compared the highest with the lowest quartiles in this group, risk increased 4.3-fold for early-onset CRC (95% CI 3.61-5.01) vs 2.9-fold for late-onset CRC (95% CI 2.70-3.00). Sensitivity analyses were consistent with these findings., Conclusions: In an analysis of associations with CRC per standard deviation of PRS, we found the cumulative burden of CRC-associated common genetic variants to associate with early-onset cancer, and to be more strongly associated with early-onset than late-onset cancer, particularly in the absence of CRC family history. Analyses of PRS, along with environmental and lifestyle risk factors, might identify younger individuals who would benefit from preventive measures., (Copyright © 2020 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Numerous organizations, including the United States Preventive Services Task Force, recommend annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT for high risk adults who meet specific criteria. Despite recommendations and national coverage for screening eligible adults through the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, LCS uptake in the United States remains low (<4%). In recognition of the need to improve and understand LCS across the population, as part of the larger Population-based Research to Optimize the Screening PRocess (PROSPR) consortium, the NCI (Bethesda, MD) funded the Lung PROSPR Research Consortium consisting of five diverse healthcare systems in Colorado, Hawaii, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Using various methods and data sources, the center aims to examine utilization and outcomes of LCS across diverse populations, and assess how variations in the implementation of LCS programs shape outcomes across the screening process. This commentary presents the PROSPR LCS process model, which outlines the interrelated steps needed to complete the screening process from risk assessment to treatment. In addition to guiding planned projects within the Lung PROSPR Research Consortium, this model provides insights on the complex steps needed to implement, evaluate, and improve LCS outcomes in community practice., (©2019 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: Most genetics studies lack the diversity necessary to ensure that all groups benefit from genetic research., Objectives: To explore facilitators and barriers to genetic research participation., Methods: We conducted a survey on genetics in research and healthcare from November 15, 2017 to February 28, 2018 among adult Kaiser Permanente (KP) members who had been invited to participate in the KP biobank (KP Research Bank). We used logistic regression to calculate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the willingness to participate in genetic research under different return of results scenarios and genetic discrimination concerns between groups, according to their demographic characteristics., Results: A total of 57,331 KP members were invited to participate, and 10,369 completed the survey (18% response rate). Respondents were 65% female, 44% non-Hispanic White (NH White), 22% Asian/Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (Asian/PI), 19% non-Hispanic Black (NH Black), and 16% Hispanic. Respondents willing to participate in genetic research ranged from 22% with no results returned to 87% if health-related genetic results were returned. We also found variation by race/ethnicity; when no results were to be returned, Asian/PIs, Hispanics, and NH Blacks were less likely to want to participate than NH Whites (p < 0.05). However, when results were returned, disparities in the willingness to participate disappeared for NH Blacks and Hispanics. Genetic discrimination concerns were more prevalent in Asian/PIs, Hispanics, and NH Blacks than in NH Whites (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Policies that prohibit the return of results and do not address genetic discrimination concerns may contribute to a greater underrepresentation of diverse groups in genetic research., (© 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Purpose: To describe patterns of opioid use in cancer survivors., Methods: In a cohort study of colon cancer patients diagnosed during 1995-2014 and enrolled at two Kaiser Permanente regions, we constructed quarterly measures of opioid use from 1 year before cancer diagnosis through 5 years after diagnosis to examine changes in use. Measures included any use, incident use, regular use (use ≥ 45 days in a 91-day quarter), and average daily dose (converted to morphine milligram equivalent, MME). We also assessed temporal trends of opioid use., Results: Of 2,039 colon cancer patients, 11-15% received opioids in the four pre-diagnosis quarters, 68% in the first quarter after diagnosis, and 15-17% in each subsequent 19 quarters. Regular opioid use increased from 3 to 5% pre-diagnosis to 5-7% post diagnosis. Average dose increased from 15 to 17 MME/day pre-diagnosis to 14-22 MME/day post diagnosis (excluding the quarter in which cancer was diagnosed). Among post-diagnosis opioid users, 73-95% were on a low dose (< 20 MME/day). Over years, regular use of opioids increased in survivorship with no change in dosage., Conclusion: Opioid use slightly increased following a colon cancer diagnosis, but high-dose use was rare. Research is needed to differentiate under- versus over-treatment of cancer pain.

Purpose: To evaluate health care systems for the availability of population-level data on the frequency of use and results of clinical molecular marker tests to inform precision cancer care., Methods: We assessed cancer-related molecular marker test data availability across 12 US health care systems in the Cancer Research Network. Overall, these systems provide care to a diverse population of more than 12 million people in the United States. We performed qualitative analyses of test data availability for five blood-based protein, nine germline, and 14 tissue-based tumor marker tests in each health care system's electronic health record and tumor registry using key informants, test code lists, and manual review of data types and output. We then performed quantitative analyses to estimate the proportion of patients with cancer with test utilization data and results for specific molecular marker tests., Results: Health systems were able to systematically capture population-level data on all five blood protein markers, six of 14 tissue-based tumor markers, and none of the nine germline markers. Successful, systematic data capture was achievable for tests with electronic data feeds for test results (blood protein markers) or through prior manual abstraction by tumor registrars (select tumor-based markers). For test results stored in scanned image files (particularly germline and tumor marker tests), information on which test was performed and test results was not readily accessible in an electronic format., Conclusion: Even in health care systems with sophisticated electronic health records, there were few codified data elements available for evaluating precision cancer medicine test use and results at the population level. Health care organizations should establish standards for electronic reporting of precision medicine tests to expedite cancer research and facilitate the implementation of precision medicine approaches.

Purpose: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening guidelines recommend increased surveillance of individuals with sessile serrated adenomas/polyps (SSA/Ps), but there is uncertainty about the risk associated with SSA/Ps. We aimed to determine the association between SSA/Ps and subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia., Methods: This case-control study included Kaiser Permanente Washington (KPWA) members who received an index colonoscopy between 1/1/1998 and 12/31/2007, and had hyperplastic polyps (HPs) or SSA/Ps but no conventional adenomas according to study pathologist histologic review. Subsequent pathology reports and biopsies through 1/1/2013 were reviewed for advanced colorectal neoplasia. We linked to the Seattle-Puget Sound Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) registry to identify additional CRC cases. We used generalized estimating equations with a logit link to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for advanced colorectal neoplasia, comparing those with SSA/Ps to those with HPs., Results: There were 161 individuals with index SSA/Ps, 548 with HPs, and 918 subsequent endoscopies included in analyses. Of those with index SSA/Ps, 19 had subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia; 39 with HPs had subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia. Compared to those with HPs, those with SSA/Ps were not statistically significantly more likely to have subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia (adjusted OR 1.79; CI 0.98-3.28). Polyp size ≥ 10 mm, right colon location, and the presence of multiple serrated polyps were also not associated with advanced colorectal neoplasia., Conclusions: Our results suggest that there is not a strong association between SSA/Ps and subsequent advanced colorectal neoplasia during the 5 years following SSA/P removal.

Background: Despite the importance of characterizing colonoscopy indication for quality monitoring and cancer screening program evaluation, there is no standard approach to documenting colonoscopy indication in medical records., Methods: We applied two algorithms in three health care systems to assign colonoscopy indication to persons 50-89 years old who received a colonoscopy during 2010-2013. Both algorithms used standard procedure, diagnostic, and laboratory codes. One algorithm, the KPNC algorithm, used a hierarchical approach to classify exam indication into: diagnostic, surveillance, or screening; whereas the other, the SEARCH algorithm, used a logistic regression-based algorithm to provide the probability that colonoscopy was performed for screening. Gold standard assessment of indication was from medical records abstraction., Results: There were 1,796 colonoscopy exams included in analyses; age and racial/ethnic distributions of participants differed across health care systems. The KPNC algorithm's sensitivities and specificities for screening indication ranged from 0.78-0.82 and 0.78-0.91, respectively; sensitivities and specificities for diagnostic indication ranged from 0.78-0.89 and 0.74-0.82, respectively. The KPNC algorithm had poor sensitivities (ranging from 0.11-0.67) and high specificities for surveillance exams. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the SEARCH algorithm for screening indication ranged from 0.76-0.84 across health care systems. For screening indication, the KPNC algorithm obtained higher specificities than the SEARCH algorithm at the same sensitivity., Conclusion: Despite standardized implementation of these indication algorithms across three health care systems, the capture of colonoscopy indication data was imperfect. Thus, we recommend that standard, systematic documentation of colonoscopy indication should be added to medical records to ensure efficient and accurate data capture., Competing Interests: The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Purpose: Our objective was to describe differences in treatment patterns and survival between early-onset (< 50 years old) and late-onset colorectal cancer (CRC) patients in community-based health systems., Methods: We used tumor registry and electronic health record data to identify and characterize patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum from 2010 to 2014 at six US health systems in the patient outcomes to advance learning (PORTAL) network. We used logistic regression to estimate adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing the distribution of tumor characteristics and treatment patterns in early-onset versus late-onset CRC. Cox regression models were used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and CIs comparing survival between early- and late-onset CRC patients., Results: There were 1,424 early-onset and 10,810 late-onset CRC cases in our analyses. Compared to late-onset CRC, early-onset CRC was significantly associated with advanced-stage disease, high-grade histology, signet ring histology, and rectal or left colon location. After adjusting for differences in tumor and patient characteristics, early-onset patients were more likely than late-onset patients to have > 12 lymph nodes examined (OR 1.60, CI 1.37-1.87), to receive systemic therapy (chemotherapy or immunotherapy) within 6 months of diagnosis (OR 2.84, CI 2.40-3.37), and to have a reduced risk of CRC-specific death (HR 0.66, CI 0.56-0.79)., Conclusions: Early-onset CRC is associated with aggressive tumor characteristics, distal location, and systemic therapy use. Despite some adverse risk factors, these patients tend to have better survival than older onset patients.