Search

Introduction: In 2018, the US Preventive Services Task Force updated cervical cancer screening recommendations to allow for screening every 5 years with primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing in combination with cytology (cotesting) or every 5 years with primary HPV screening alone. Despite these changes, the uptake of primary HPV screening has been lower than expected. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the patient perspective of an integrated health system transition from cotesting to primary HPV testing among a 30- to 65-year-old cohort., Methods: Semistructured phone interviews were conducted from July to December 2023 at Kaiser Permanente Colorado with 16 members aged 30-65 years. Interviews asked about reactions to the forthcoming change in cervical cancer screening, personal concern about cervical cancer risk, feedback on patient-facing education materials, and preference on communication timing and modality., Results: Participants reported concerns about cervical cancer screening intervals, primarily the reduction in frequency leading to underdiagnosis of sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Participants recommended defining the rationale for the change to primary HPV testing in the patient education materials. Participants preferred communication about the change in-clinic between practitioner and patient., Discussion: The interviews identified key themes, including the differentiation between cervical cancer and STI screening methodologies, potential underdiagnosis of STI and cervical cancer, and the rationale supporting primary HPV testing and associated screening intervals., Conclusion: These qualitative findings can inform health systems of potential patient concerns to address when considering the transition from cotesting every 3 years to primary HPV testing every 5 years for cervical cancer screening.

Background: Disparities in ovarian cancer survival for African American women are multifactorial. We evaluated racial and ethnic differences in time to ovarian cancer surgery in members of an integrated health care system., Patients and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified women diagnosed with invasive epithelial-type ovarian cancer between January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2014, at an integrated health care system in the United States. We extracted data on cancer-related variables and sociodemographic variables from the health care system's cancer registry and electronic health records. We included patients who received ovarian cancer surgery without neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We defined time to surgery as the number of days between diagnostic imaging study and surgery. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to evaluate crude and adjusted association of race and ethnicity with time to surgery., Results: Of 872 patients included, 55.1% were non-Hispanic White (hereafter, White), 24.9% were Hispanic, 14.6% were Asian/Pacific Islander (PI)/Native American, and 5.5% were African American. Median age at diagnosis was 59.0 years. African American patients were diagnosed at an older age and were more likely to come from deprived neighborhoods than other racial and ethnic groups. Median time to surgery was longer for African American patients compared with White, Hispanic, and Asian/PI/Native American patients (median days: 27.5 vs 21.0, 24.5, and 26.0, respectively; P<.0001). In adjusted models, the likelihood of having received surgery at any given time post diagnostic imaging was 31% lower for African American patients compared with White patients (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.51-0.93). This likelihood was also lower for Hispanic and Asian/PI/Native American patients, but not statistically significant., Conclusions: Our findings showed that patients with ovarian cancer from racial and ethnic minorities had a lower likelihood of having received surgery at any given time post diagnostic imaging compared with White patients, demonstrating that racial and ethnic differences exist in time to ovarian cancer surgery in patients with relatively equal access to care.

The weathering hypothesis proposes that marginalized people experience faster biologic aging due to cumulative stress which translates to chronic disease disparities. We assessed telomere length (TL) differences, an aging biomarker, by sexual orientation (bisexual, gay/lesbian, straight) among 102,258 individuals enrolled in the Resource for Genetic Epidemiology Research on Aging Cohort during 2008 through 2011 (mean age of 60.6 years, 58% female, and 7.6% bisexual/gay/lesbian). We used linear models to estimate differences in telomere length, stratified by sex/gender and adjusted for age (at salivary sample) and socio-demographic variables and Kitagawa-Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition to quantify contributions of participant factors on TL differences. Among females, there was no significant difference in age-adjusted telomere length by sexual orientation after adjustment for socio-demographics (ref: straight; bisexual 0.007, 95%CI: -0.03 to 0.04; lesbian: 0.005, 95%CI: -0.02 to 0.03). Among males, only gay (-0.04, 95%CI: -0.06 to -0.02) but not bisexual (-0.02, 95%CI: -0.06 to 0.02) men had significantly shorter age-adjusted telomere length compared to straight men after adjusting for socio-demographic variables. Decomposition analysis identified ever smoking and marital status as significant drivers of the gay-straight disparity. Studies confirming our findings are needed and the implications of shorter telomeres on gay men's health requires further investigation., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Current clinical guidelines recommended primary human papillomavirus (HPV) screening for cervical cancer testing. Previous studies reported patient-level barriers (e.g., limited knowledge and attachment to Pap test) that may hinder wide adoption of primary HPV screening. We assessed these women-level factors following the implementation of primary HPV screening (July 2020) at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC). Methods: We administered a patient survey (mail and on-line) to female KPSC members aged 30-65 years who received primary HPV screening between October and December 2020. Those who preferred English vs. Spanish language were sampled separately. The survey included domains on knowledge about HPV and HPV screening, awareness of screening guidelines, and attitudes about HPV testing. Demographic data were collected using electronic health records. We used weighted multivariable logistic and modified Poisson regressions for associations between language preference and survey responses. Results: In total, 3,009 surveys were returned (38.0% response rate). Few women (7.0%) found HPV testing as an acceptable screening method. The majority of women (92.2%) remained unaware that HPV testing can replace Pap test for screening. The Pap test was the most preferred screening approach for 33.2% Spanish-speaking women vs. 19.9% English-speaking women. Only 20.6% knew that women aged 30-65 years can be screened every 5 years with cotest or primary HPV screening. Most women (96.4%) did not perceive stigma about taking the HPV test. Conclusion: Proactive patient education will help improve women's knowledge about primary HPV screening, which may facilitate its implementation in additional health care settings.

Objective: To describe patterns of cancer treatment and live birth outcomes that followed a cancer diagnosis during pregnancy. Study Design: The Adolescent and Young Adult (AYA) Horizon Study is an observational study evaluating outcomes in survivors of the five most common types of cancer in this age group (15-39 years old). Of the 23,629 individuals identified diagnosed with breast, lymphoma, thyroid, melanoma, or gynecological cancer in North Carolina (2000-2015) and California (2004-2016), we identified 555 live births to individuals who experienced cancer diagnosis during pregnancy. Births to individuals diagnosed with cancer during pregnancy were matched ∼1:5 on maternal age and year of delivery to live births to individuals without a cancer diagnosis ( N = 2,667). Multivariable Poisson regression was used to compare birth outcomes between pregnancies affected by a cancer diagnosis and unaffected matched pregnancies. Results: Cancer diagnosis during pregnancy was associated with an increased risk of preterm delivery (prevalence ratio [PR] 2.70; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.24, 3.26); very preterm delivery (PR 1.74; 95% CI 1.12, 2.71); induction of labor (PR 1.48; 95% CI 1.27, 1.73); low birth weight (PR 1.97; 95% CI 1.55, 2.50); and cesarean delivery (PR 1.18; 95% CI 1.04, 1.34) but not associated with low Apgar score (PR 0.90; 95% CI 0.39, 2.06). In our sample, 41% of patients received chemotherapy, half of whom initiated chemotherapy during pregnancy, and 86% received surgery, 58% of whom had surgery during pregnancy. Of the 19% who received radiation, all received radiation treatment following pregnancy. Conclusion: We identified an increased risk of birth outcomes, including preterm and very preterm delivery, induction of labor, low birth weight, and cesarean delivery, to those experiencing a cancer diagnosis during pregnancy. This analysis contributes to the available evidence for those experiencing a cancer diagnosis during pregnancy.

Background: Adolescents and young adults frequently receive chemotherapy near death. We know less about the use of targeted agents and immunotherapy or trends over time., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1836 adolescents and young adults with cancer who died between 2009 and 2019 after receiving care at 1 of 3 sites (Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Kaiser Permanente Northern California, and Kaiser Permanente Southern California). We reviewed electronic health data and medical records to examine use of cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and investigational drugs., Results: Over the study period, 35% of adolescents and young adults received chemotherapy in the last 90 days of life; 24% received targeted therapy, 7% immunotherapy, and 5% investigational drugs. Additionally, 56% received at least 1 form of systemic cancer-directed therapy in the last 90 days of life. After adjustment for patient sex, race, ethnicity, age, site of care, diagnosis, and years from diagnosis to death, the proportion of adolescents and young adults receiving targeted therapy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05 per year of death, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02 to 1.10; P = .006), immunotherapy (OR = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.18 to 1.38; P < .0001), and any cancer-directed therapy (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.08; P = .01) in the last 90 days of life increased over time., Conclusions: More than half of adolescents and young adults receive cancer therapy in the last 90 days of life, and use of novel agents such as targeted therapy and immunotherapy is increasing over time. Although some adolescents and young adults may wish to continue cancer therapy while living with advanced disease, efforts are needed to ensure that use of cancer-directed therapy meets preferences of adolescents and young adults approaching death., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the associations between neighborhood income, education, and neighborhood racial composition (measured as a low percentage of white residents) and risk of developing cardiovascular diseases (CVD), diabetes (DM), and severe depression among survivors of AYA cancer and matched non-cancer peers., Methods: Two-year survivors of AYA cancers diagnosed at age 15-39 yrs at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (diagnosed 2000-2012) and individually matched (1:13) non-cancer subjects were included. The development of CVD, DM, and severe depression was ascertained via electronic health records. Neighborhood characteristics were obtained from census-based geocoded data. Cox regression evaluated associations between neighborhood characteristics and the health outcomes of interest among both the cancer survivors and the non-cancer comparison cohort and effect modification by cancer survivor status on these relationships., Results: Among cancer survivors (n = 6774), living in mostly non-white neighborhoods, was associated with risk of CVD (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.54 (95% CI 1.00-2.36)), while lower education level (HR = 1.41 (95% CI 1.02-1.94)) was associated with risk of severe depression. None of the neighborhood characteristics were associated with risk of DM. Effect modification was found for neighborhood education and risk of DM and severe depression., Conclusion: When jointly considered, cancer survivors who resided in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods were at the highest risk of developing these health outcomes compared to other subgroups., Implications for Cancer Survivors: Our findings may inform screening strategy and addressing social determinants of health among AYA cancer survivors., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Little evidence exists to guide continuation of screening beyond the recommended ages of national guidelines for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers, although increasing age and comorbidity burden is likely to reduce the screening benefit of lower mortality., Objective: Characterize screening after recommended stopping ages, by age and comorbidities in a large, diverse sample., Design: Serial cross-sectional., Participants: All individuals in the PROSPR-I consortium cohorts from 75 to 89 years of age for breast cancer screening, 66-89 years of age for cervical cancer screening, and 76-89 years of age for colorectal cancer screening from 2011 to 2013. The lower age thresholds were based on the guidelines for each respective cancer type., Main Measures: Proportion of annual screening by cancer type in relation to age and Charlson comorbidity score and median years of screening past guideline age. We estimated the likelihood of screening past the guideline-based age as a function of age and comorbidity using logistic regression., Key Results: The study cohorts included individuals screening for breast (n = 33,475); cervical (n = 459,318); and colorectal (n = 556,356) cancers. In the year following aging out, approximately 30% of the population was screened for breast cancer, 2% of the population was screened for cervical, and almost 5% for colorectal cancer. The median number of years screened past the guideline-based recommendation was 5, 3, and 4 for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancer, respectively. Of those screening  > 10 years past the guideline-based age,15%, 46%, and 25% had  ≥ 3 comorbidities respectively. Colorectal cancer screening had the smallest decline in the likelihood of screening beyond the age-based recommendation., Conclusions: The odds of screening past guideline-based age decreased with comorbidity burden for breast and cervical cancer screening but not for colorectal. These findings suggest the need to evaluate shared decision tools to help patients understand whether screening is appropriate and to generate more evidence in older populations., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Society of General Internal Medicine.)

Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic posed critical challenges in providing care to ovarian cancer (OC) patients, including delays in OC diagnosis and treatment initiation. To accommodate for delays in OC surgery, the Society of Gynecologic Oncology (SGO) recommended preferential use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy during the pandemic. The purpose of this study was to assess the association of the COVID-19 pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use in patients diagnosed with OC., Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with stage II-IV ovarian cancer of epithelial subtype between 01/01/2017-06/30/2021 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), a large integrated healthcare system in the United States. Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed between 2017-2020 were identified from KPSC's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-affiliated cancer registry. Patients diagnosed in 2021 were identified from the electronic medical records (EMR) using ICD-10 diagnosis codes, followed by medical chart review to validate diagnosis and extract information on histology and stage at diagnosis. March 4, 2020 was used as the cut-off to define pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. Patients diagnosed with COVID-19 between OC diagnosis and treatment completion were excluded. Data on neoadjuvant chemotherapy use were extracted from the cancer registry and EMR, supplemented by chart review. Modified Poisson regression was used to evaluate the association of the pandemic with neoadjuvant chemotherapy use., Results: Of 566 OC patients, 160 (28.3%) were diagnosed in the pandemic period. Patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were slightly younger (mean age 62.7 vs 64.9 years, p=0.07) and had a higher burden of Charlson comorbidities (p=0.05) than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period. No differences in time to treatment initiation were observed by pandemic periods. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use was documented in 58.7% patients during the pandemic period compared to 47.3% in pre-pandemic period (p=0.01). After adjusting for covariates, patients diagnosed in the pandemic period were 29% more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed in pre-pandemic period [RR(95%CI): 1.29(1.12-1.49)]., Discussions: Ovarian cancer patients diagnosed in the COVID-19 pandemic were more likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy than patients diagnosed before the pandemic. Future research on patient outcomes and trends in the post-pandemic period are warranted., Competing Interests: Author LX was employed by MedHealth Statistical Consulting Inc. Authors ES and MM are employees of Merck & Co, Inc. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision. The authors declare that this study received funding from Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA, and AstraZeneca UK Ltd. The funder was involved in the study design and interpretation of data., (Copyright © 2024 Mukherjee, Shammas, Xu, Cannavale, Gilfillan, Szamreta, Monberg, Hodeib and Chao.)

Adolescents, young adults with cancer receive limited psychosocial and spiritual support near death.

Purpose: When a cancer diagnosis coincides with caring for children, it may influence the financial impacts of cancer and decisions to pursue advance care planning (ACP) or genetic testing. We examined associations between caring for children and financial hardship, ACP, and genetic testing among female adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors in North Carolina and California. Methods: Participants were diagnosed at ages 15-39 years with breast, melanoma, gynecologic, lymphoma, or thyroid cancer during 2004-2016. We estimated adjusted prevalence differences (aPDs) and ratios (aPRs) for each outcome by child caring status using marginal structural binomial regression models. Results: Among 1595 women ages 19-54 years at survey (median = 7 years since diagnosis), 819 (51.3%) reported that they were caring for children at diagnosis. Women caring for children had a higher prevalence of material financial hardship (e.g., medical debt; 30% vs. 21.9%; aPD = 9%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3 to 14; aPR = 1.39, 95% CI: 1.12 to 1.72) but similar levels of psychological financial hardship compared to noncaregivers. Women caring for children were more likely to complete ACPs (42.2% vs. 30.7%; aPD = 9%, 95% CI: 3 to 16; aPR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.57). Among the 723 survivors of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer, the prevalence of genetic testing was higher among women caring for children (89%) than noncaregivers (81%); this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: Women caring for children at diagnosis may be at elevated risk for adverse financial outcomes and may benefit from additional financial navigation support. Childcare responsibilities may further complicate health decision-making for AYAs diagnosed with cancer.

Background: Many women diagnosed with cancer as adolescents and young adults (AYAs, age 15-39 years) want biological children after cancer but lack information on the potential impact of their cancer history on future reproductive outcomes. We investigated the risk of adverse birth outcomes among AYA cancer survivors., Methods: We identified insured women diagnosed with AYA breast cancer, thyroid cancer, gynecologic cancers, lymphoma, or melanoma from 2003 to 2016 in the state of North Carolina or the Kaiser Permanente health care systems in northern and southern California. Post-diagnosis births to cancer survivors were each matched with up to 5 births to women without cancer. Risk ratios for preterm birth (<37 completed weeks), very preterm birth (<34 completed weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g), and small for gestational age (SGA, <10th percentile of weight for gestational age) were estimated using modified Poisson regression., Results: Analyses included 1648 births to 1268 AYA cancer survivors and 7879 births to 6066 women without cancer. Overall, risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth, low birth weight, and SGA did not significantly differ between births to women with and without cancer. However, births to women with gynecologic cancers had a significantly increased risk of low birth weight (risk ratio = 1.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.03 to 3.21) and suggested increased risk of preterm birth (risk ratio = 1.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.99 to 2.54). Chemotherapy exposure was not associated with increased risk of adverse birth outcomes., Conclusions: Women with gynecologic cancers, but not other cancers, had an increased risk of adverse birth outcomes compared to women without cancer., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press.)