Search

Background: There are more than 18 million cancer survivors in the United States. Yet, survivors of color remain under-represented in cancer survivorship research (Saltzman et al. in Contemp Clin Trials Commun 29:100986, 2022; Pang et al. in J Clin Oncol 34:3992-3999, 2016; Lythgoe et al. in Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 24:1208-1211, 2021). Our long-term goal is to enroll and follow a cohort of historically under-represented cancer survivors, to better understand modifiable risk factors that influence clinical and quality of life outcomes in these populations. Towards that goal, we describe herein how we applied community-based participatory research approaches to develop inclusive study materials for enrolling such a cohort., Methods: We implemented community engagement strategies to inform and enhance the study website and recruitment materials for this cohort including: hiring a dedicated engagement coordinator/community health educator as a member of our team; working with the Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center Office of Community Engagement (OCE) and Community Advisory Board members; presenting our educational, research, and study recruitment materials at community events; and establishing a community advisory group specifically for the study (4 individuals). In parallel with these efforts, 20 semi-structured user testing interviews were conducted with diverse cancer survivors to inform the look, feel, and usability of the study website., Results: Engagement with community members was a powerful and important approach for this study's development. Feedback was solicited and used to inform decisions regarding the study name (eat move sleep, EMOVES), logo, study website content and imagery, and recruitment materials. Based on community feedback, we developed additional educational materials on healthy groceries and portion size in multiple languages and created a study video., Conclusions: Including an engagement coordinator as a permanent team member, partnering with the institutional community outreach and engagement resources (i.e., OCE), and allocating dedicated time and financial support for cultivating relationships with stakeholders outside the university were critical to the development of the study website and materials. Our community guided strategies will be tested as we conduct enrollment through community advisor networks and via the state cancer registry., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Few studies have examined health literacy and fertility knowledge among women from low income, socio-culturally diverse communities presenting for fertility care in the United States. Our study sought to examine demographic predictors of fertility-related knowledge among infertile women from low and high-resource communities in two major metropolitan centers in the United States., Methods: Fertility Knowledge Assessments were administered to women presenting for fertility care at county medical centers serving low-resource, largely immigrant patients and to women from largely affluent populations presenting to comprehensive fertility centers in two cities. The influence of demographic predictors on fertility knowledge was examined through regression analysis., Results: A total of 143 women were included in our analysis. In the county hospital/low resource clinic (LR, n  = 70), the mean age was 32.8 ± 6.1 years vs 35.0 ± 5.0 years in the fee-for-service/high resource clinic (HR, n  = 73). Among the LR patients, 74% were immigrants, 71% had an annual income <$25,000 and 52% had completed high school. Among HR patients, 36% were immigrants, 60% had an annual income >$100,000, and 95% had some college or above. On average, women from HR settings scored 3.0 points higher on the Fertility Knowledge Assessment than their LR counterparts ( p  < 0.001). Upon multivariate analysis, education level remained the sole independent factor associated with fertility knowledge assessment score ( p  < 0.001). Stratifying by resource level revealed that income was highly associated with fertility knowledge ( p  < 0.01) among high resource individuals even when adjusting for education level., Conclusions: Women from low resource, largely immigrant communities, seeking fertility care have greater disparities in fertility knowledge and lower health literacy compared to women from high resource clinical settings. Further studies are needed to understand these barriers and to develop targeted inventions to lower disparities and improve care for these vulnerable populations., Competing Interests: Competing interestsNot applicable., (© The Author(s) 2020.)

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Background: Testicular sex cord stromal tumors (SCSTs) are managed similarly to germ cell tumors (GCTs); however, few studies have directly compared outcomes between these tumor types. Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), we sought to compare overall and stage-specific all-cause mortality (ACM) between SCSTs versus GCTs., Methods: NCDB was queried for patients diagnosed with SCSTs and GCTs between 2004 and 2013. Descriptive statistics were used to compare sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between groups. Univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to assess associations with ACM., Results: We identified 42,192 patients diagnosed with testicular cancer between 2004 and 2013, with 280 having SCSTs and 41,912 patients having GCTs. Median age for SCSTs and GCTs was 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 34-59) and 34 (IQR 27-43), respectively (p < 0.001). Median follow-up was 39 and 52 months, respectively. Overall, patients with SCSTs had greater risk of ACM compared to those with GCTs (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.14-2.50). Private insurance, greater education, and fewer comorbidities were associated with reduced risk of ACM (p < 0.05 for all). Among those with stage I disease, tumor type was not associated with ACM on multivariable analysis. Among those with stage II/III disease, patients with SCSTs had increased risk of ACM compared to patients with GCTs (HR 3.29, 95% CI 1.89-5.72)., Conclusions: Patients with advanced SCSTs had worse survival outcomes compared to those with advanced GCTs. These data suggest a need for further investigation to ascertain effective management recommendations for SCSTs.