Search

BACKGROUND: Persons who speak languages other than English are underrepresented in clinical trials, likely in part because of inadequate multilevel resources. We conducted a survey of institutions affiliated with the Childrens Oncology Group (COG) to characterize current research recruitment practices and resources regarding translation and interpretation services. METHODS: In October 2022, a 20-item survey was distributed electronically to institutions affiliated with COG to assess consent practices and resources for recruiting participants who speak languages other than English to COG trials. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize responses; responses were compared by institution size and type as well as respondent role. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 230 institutions, and the response rate was 60% (n = 139). In total, 60% (n = 83) of those respondents had access to short-form consent forms. Full consent form translation was required at 50% of institutions, and 12% of institutional review boards restricted use of centrally translated consent forms. Forty-six percent (n = 64) of institutions reported insufficient funding to support translation costs; 19% (n = 26) had access to no-cost translation services. Forty-four percent (n = 61) were required to use in-person interpreters for consent discussions; the most frequently cited barrier (56%) to obtaining consent was lack of available in-person interpreters. Forty-seven percent (n = 65) reported that recruiting persons who speak languages other than English to clinical trials was somewhat or very difficult. CONCLUSIONS: Institutions affiliated with COG face resource-specific challenges that impede recruitment of participants who speak languages other than English for clinical trials. These findings indicate an urgent need to identify strategies aimed at reducing recruitment barriers to ensure equitable access to clinical trials.

Providing evidence-based supportive care for children with cancer has the potential to optimize treatment outcomes and improve quality of life. The Children's Oncology Group (COG) Supportive Care Guidelines Subcommittee conducted a systematic review to identify current supportive care clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) relevant to childhood cancer or pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Only 22 papers met the 2011 Institute of Medicine criteria to be considered a CPG. The results highlight the paucity of CPGs available to pediatric oncology healthcare professionals and the pressing need to create CPGs using current methodological standards.

Background: The primary objective was to measure adherence to clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations for fertility preservation (FP) in pediatric cancer patients treated in National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) sites. Secondary objectives were to describe factors such as site size associated with CPG-inconsistent care delivery and cryopreservation completion. Methods: This retrospective, multicenter study included patients 15 to 21 years old with a first cancer diagnosis from January 2014 through December 2015 who were previously enrolled to a Children's Oncology Group (COG) study and received care at a participating NCORP site. Patients were randomly selected from a list generated by the COG for chart review by participating sites. Primary outcome was care delivery that was inconsistent with a strong CPG recommendation on FP, namely discussion and offering of FP options before cancer treatment initiation, as adjudicated centrally by a panel. Results: A total of 129 patients from 25 sites were included. Among these, 48% (62/129) received CPG-inconsistent care. Most CPG-inconsistent care was due to lack of FP discussion documentation (93.5%, 58/62). Small site size, treatment at a pediatric (vs mixed adult/pediatric) site, and female sex were associated with higher odds of CPG-inconsistent care delivery. Conclusions: Newly diagnosed pediatric cancer patients often received CPG-inconsistent care for FP, with disproportionate gaps noted for females, and those treated at smaller or pediatric NCORP sites. The primary reason for CPG-inconsistent care is lack of FP discussion from clinicians. Opportunities to improve FP CPG implementation are highlighted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BackgroundPediatric oncology patients are at an increased risk of invasive bacterial infection due to immunosuppression. The risk of such infection in the absence of severe neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count ≥ 500/μL) is not well established and a validated prediction model for blood stream infection (BSI) risk offers clinical usefulness.MethodsA 6-site retrospective external validation was conducted using a previously published risk prediction model for BSI in febrile pediatric oncology patients without severe neutropenia: the Esbenshade/Vanderbilt (EsVan) model. A reduced model (EsVan2) excluding 2 less clinically reliable variables also was created using the initial EsVan model derivative cohort, and was validated using all 5 external validation cohorts. One data set was used only in sensitivity analyses due to missing some variables.ResultsFrom the 5 primary data sets, there were a total of 1197 febrile episodes and 76 episodes of bacteremia. The overall C statistic for predicting bacteremia was 0.695, with a calibration slope of 0.50 for the original model and a calibration slope of 1.0 when recalibration was applied to the model. The model performed better in predicting high-risk bacteremia (gram-negative or Staphylococcus aureus infection) versus BSI alone, with a C statistic of 0.801 and a calibration slope of 0.65. The EsVan2 model outperformed the EsVan model across data sets with a C statistic of 0.733 for predicting BSI and a C statistic of 0.841 for high-risk BSI.ConclusionsThe results of this external validation demonstrated that the EsVan and EsVan2 models are able to predict BSI across multiple performance sites and, once validated and implemented prospectively, could assist in decision making in clinical practice. Cancer 2017;123:3781-3790. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Background: Adolescents and young adults (AYAs) commonly receive cancer care in the community setting, but the availability of treatment options, resources, and support services for this population is not well known. The National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) funds a network of practices whose mission is to increase access to cancer care and clinical trials in the community setting. We describe our interdisciplinary methodological approach to identify and characterize NCORP practices where AYAs receive cancer care. Methods: NCORP practices completed a cross-sectional Landscape Assessment to describe resources and practice characteristics. We established an interdisciplinary team of stakeholders to analyze the Landscape Assessment data relating to AYAs. Through an iterative process, we assessed NCORP practice responses to questions assessing AYA cancer care capacity, determined a threshold to define practices treating AYAs, and characterized these practices. Results: We determined that practices provide cancer care to AYAs if the following criteria were met: (1) endorsed having an AYA program (n = 20), (2) AYAs comprised ≥5% of annual cancer cases (n = 55), or (3) the practice treated ≥50 AYA cancer cases annually (n = 70). Of 271 NCORP practices, 100 (37%) met any criteria, whereas 87 (32%) did not; 84 (31%) could not be classified due to missing or unknown data. Conclusion: Using an interdisciplinary process, we define practices that treat AYAs in the community. We posit a uniform approach to examine resources and practice capacity for AYAs receiving cancer care across the United States to guide future AYA-focused cancer care delivery research development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We qualitatively explored the unique needs and preferences for financial toxicity screening and interventions to address financial toxicity among adolescents and emerging adults (younger AYAs: 15–25 years) with cancer and their caregivers. Methods: We recruited English‐ or Spanish‐speaking younger AYAs who were treated for cancer within the past 2 years and their caregivers. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted to explore preferences for screening and interventional study development to address financial toxicity. The data were coded using conventional content analysis. Codes were reviewed with the study team, and interviews continued until saturation was reached; codes were consolidated into categories and themes during consensus discussions. Results: We interviewed 17 participants; nine were younger AYAs. Seven of the 17 preferred to speak Spanish. We identified three cross‐cutting themes: burden, support, and routine, consistent, and clear. The burden came in the form of unexpected costs such as transportation to appointments, as well as emotional burdens such as AYAs worrying about how much their family sacrificed for their care or caregivers worrying about the AYA's physical and financial future. Support, in the form of familial, community, healthcare institution, and insurance, was critical to mitigating the effects of financial toxicity in this population. Participants emphasized the importance of meeting individual financial needs by routinely and consistently asking about financial factors and providing clear guidance to navigate these needs. Conclusion: Younger AYAs and their caregivers experience significant financial challenges and unmet health‐related social needs during cancer treatment and often rely on key supports to alleviate these unmet needs. When developing interventions to mitigate financial toxicity, clinicians and health systems should prioritize clear, consistent, and tailorable approaches to support younger AYA cancer survivors and their families. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

PURPOSE Oral anticancer drugs (OACDs) have become increasingly prevalent over the past decade. OACD prescriptions require coordination between payers and providers, which can delay drug receipt. We examined the association between insurance type, pursuit of copayment assistance, pursuit of prior authorization (PA), and time to receipt (TTR) for new OACD prescriptions. METHODS We prospectively collected data on new OACD prescriptions for adult oncology patients from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, including demographic and clinical characteristics, insurance type, and pursuit of PA and copayment assistance. TTR was defined as the number of days from prescription to OACD receipt. We summarized TTR using cumulative incidence and compared TTR by insurance type, pursuit of copayment assistance, and PA activity using the logrank test. RESULTS Our cohort of 1,024 patients was 53% male, and 40% were younger than 65. Twenty-six percent had commercial insurance only, 16% had Medicaid only, and 59% had Medicare with or without additional insurance. Eighty-six percent of prescriptions were successfully received. Across all prescriptions, 69% involved PA activity, and 21% involved the copayment assistance process. In unadjusted analyses, prescriptions involving the copayment assistance process had longer TTR compared with those not involving assistance (log-rank P value = .005) and OACDs covered by Medicare/commercial insurance had a longer TTR compared with Medicaid (log-rank P value = .006). The PA process was not associated with TTR (log-rank P value = .124). CONCLUSION The process for obtaining OACDs is complex. The copayment assistance process and Medicare/commercial insurance are associated with delayed TTR. New policies are needed to reduce time to OACD receipt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]