Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies extends life for patients with advanced colorectal cancers (CRCs) whose tumors exhibit wild-type KRAS, but KRAS testing may be underused. We studied the role of socioeconomic factors in the application of KRAS testing. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We identified subjects with stage IV colorectal adenocarcinoma diagnosed 2010-2015 in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate associations between clinical/demographic factors and the rate of KRAS testing. We used multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to assess survival. RESULTS:We identified 37,676 patients with stage IV CRC, 31.1% of whom were tested for KRAS mutations, of those who had documented KRAS testing, 44% were KRAS mutant. Patients were more likely to be tested if they were younger (odds ratio [OR]=5.10 for age 20 to 29 vs. 80+, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.99-6.54, P<0.01), diagnosed more recently (OR=1.92 for 2015 vs. 2010, 95% CI: 1.77-2.08, P<0.01), or lived in an area of high median household income (OR=1.24 for median household income of >$69,311 vs. <$49,265, 95% CI: 1.14-1.35, P<0.01). Patients were less likely to be tested if they had Medicaid (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.77-0.88, P<0.01) or were unmarried (OR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.75-0.82, P<0.0001). The risk of death was decreased in patients who received KRAS testing (hazard ratio=0.77, 95% CI: 0.75-0.80, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS:We found a low rate of KRAS testing in CRC patients with those living in low-income areas less likely to be tested, even after controlling for Medicaid insurance. Our study suggests that socioeconomic disparities persist despite Medicaid insurance.

Smoking is a causal or contributory factor for nearly all genitourinary cancers and exerts significant influence on treatment, quality of life, and survival outcomes. In order to understand the influence smoking has on the outcomes of contemporary therapies, pertinent smoking-related data must be systematically collected and report. We sought to determine how often and how rigorously smoking status is collected and reported in publications of clinical trials in genitourinary cancers by conducting a systematic review. Our initial search yielded 622 articles, 354 of which met criteria. The vast majority of included studies (91.8%) did not report any details about trial participants' smoking status. When included, 96.3% of studies reported baseline status qualitatively. No studies used a validated measurement instrument or reported change in participants' smoking status over the study period. Absence of the collection and reporting of smoking-related data precludes further study of how smoking impacts outcomes and highlights an important deficiency in GU oncology clinical trial design.

BACKGROUND:Almost half of Veterans with localized prostate cancer receive inappropriate, wasteful staging imaging. Our team has explored the barriers and facilitators of guideline-concordant prostate cancer imaging and found that (1) patients with newly diagnosed prostate cancer have little concern for radiographic staging but rather focus on treatment and (2) physicians trust imaging guidelines but are apt to follow their own intuition, fear medico-legal consequences, and succumb to influence from imaging-avid colleagues. We used a theory-based approach to design a multi-level intervention strategy to promote guideline-concordant imaging to stage incident prostate cancer. METHODS:We designed the Prostate Cancer Imaging Stewardship (PCIS) intervention: a multi-site, stepped wedge, cluster-randomized trial to determine the effect of a physician-focused behavioral intervention on Veterans Health Administration (VHA) prostate cancer imaging use. The multi-level intervention, developed according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and Behavior Change Wheel, combines traditional physician behavior change methods with novel methods of communication and data collection. The intervention consists of three components: (1) a system of audit and feedback to clinicians informing individual clinicians and their sites about how their behavior compares to their peers' and to published guidelines, (2) a program of academic detailing with the goal to educate providers about prostate cancer imaging, and (3) a CPRS Clinical Order Check for potentially guideline-discordant imaging orders. The intervention will be introduced to 10 participating geographically distributed study sites. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study is a significant contribution to implementation science, providing VHA an opportunity to ensure delivery of high-quality care at the lowest cost using a theory-based approach. The study is ongoing. Preliminary data collection and recruitment have started; analysis has yet to be performed. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:CliniclTrials.gov NCT03445559. Prospectively registered on February 26, 2018.

BACKGROUND:The growth in e-cigarette use may be driven by the perception that they are a safer, healthier alternative to conventional cigarettes. However, their long-term health implications are not well known and use is discouraged by most cancer societies. It is currently unclear how cancer survivors perceive the risks associated with e-cigarette and how this may influence use in this population. METHODS:A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS) (Years 2017-2019). Our primary study outcome was the perception of harm associated with e-cigarettes compared to traditional cigarettes among adults with and without a self-reported history of cancer. We used logistic regression analyses assessing the association of a cancer history with the perception that e-cigarettes are as much or more harmful than cigarettes. RESULTS:A total of 11,846 respondents (weighted population estimate 243,728,483) were included. Of these, 26.6% reported a history of cancer. The proportion of cancer survivors who perceived e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful than conventional cigarettes was similar to non-cancer respondents (70.6% vs 68.3%, P = 0.35). There was no difference in perception of harm among cancer and non-cancer respondents, adjusted for sociodemographic factors (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.6-1.1). Past (OR 9.06, 95% Cl 5.06-16.20) and never e-cigarette use (OR 23.40, 95% Cl 13.56-40.38) as well as having a history of cardiopulmonary disease (OR 1.28, 95% Cl 1.05-1.56) was associated with higher odds of perceiving e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Cancer survivors commonly perceive e-cigarettes to be as much or more harmful than traditional cigarettes though these findings are similar to perceptions among adults without a history of cancer. There is a strong association with avoidance of e-cigarette products among those who perceive them to be harmful.

Intercept surveys are a relatively inexpensive method to rapidly collect data on drug use. However, querying use of dozens of drugs can be time-consuming. We determined whether using a rapid screener is efficacious in detecting which participants use drugs and should be offered a full survey which asks more extensively about use.

OBJECTIVE:To prospectively examine associations between smoking and nicotine abstinence and pain trajectory over 12 months among smokers with low, moderate, and severe pain and to assess whether these associations differ over time. DESIGN/METHODS:A secondary analysis of the "Proactive Outreach for Smokers in VA Mental Health" study, a randomized controlled trial of proactive outreach for veteran smokers engaged in U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) mental health care. METHODS:Participants were categorized into "low" (n = 616), "moderate" (n = 479), and "severe" pain (n = 656) groups according to baseline pain score. Associations between self-reported abstinence from smoking and nicotine at 6 and 12 months and pain trajectory, measured via the PEG scale (Pain intensity, Enjoyment of life, General activity) composite score, were assessed through the use of general linear mixed models. Interaction tests assessed whether these associations differed at 6 and 12 months. Analyses were conducted within the overall sample and within the separate pain groups. RESULTS:There were significant interactions in the overall sample and the low and moderate pain groups, such that 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence was associated with lower pain scores at 6 but not 12 months. In the severe pain group, 7-day abstinence from both smoking and nicotine was associated with lower pain scores across both time points. Six-month prolonged abstinence was not associated with pain scores. CONCLUSIONS:In this prospective analysis conducted among veteran smokers engaged in mental health services, 7-day abstinence from smoking and nicotine was associated with significantly lower levels of pain. Education efforts could help better inform smokers on the relationship between smoking and pain.

Introduction/UNASSIGNED:Smoking cessation after a cancer diagnosis can significantly improve treatment outcomes and reduce the risk of cancer recurrence and all-cause mortality. Aim/UNASSIGNED:We sought to measure the association between cancer diagnosis and subsequent smoking cessation. Methods/UNASSIGNED:. Our sample was composed of 7,286 adult smokers at the baseline representing an estimated 40.9 million persons. Smoking cessation rates after a diagnosis differed after a tobacco-related cancer (25.9%), a nontobacco-related cancer (8.9%), and no cancer diagnosis (17.9%). After adjustment, diagnosis with a tobacco-related cancer was associated with a higher odds of smoking cessation (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.00-3.33) compared to no cancer diagnosis. Diagnosis with a nontobacco-related cancer was not significantly linked to smoking cessation (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.48-1.45). Conclusion/UNASSIGNED:Diagnosis with a tobacco-related cancer is associated with greater odds of subsequent smoking cessation compared to no cancer diagnosis, suggesting that significant behavioral change may occur in this setting.

BACKGROUND:National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for incident prostate cancer staging imaging have been widely circulated and accepted as best practice since 1996. Despite these clear guidelines, wasteful and potentially harmful inappropriate imaging of men with prostate cancer remains prevalent. AIM/OBJECTIVE:To understand changing population-level patterns of imaging among men with incident prostate cancer, we created a state-transition microsimulation model based on existing literature and incident prostate cancer cases. METHODS:To create a cohort of patients, we identified incident prostate cancer cases from 2004 to 2009 that were diagnosed in men ages 65 and older from SEER. A microsimulation model allowed us to explore how this cohort's survival, quality of life, and Medicare costs would be impacted by making imaging consistent with guidelines. We conducted a probabilistic analysis as well as one-way sensitivity analysis. RESULTS:When only imaging high-risk men compared to the status quo, we found that the population rate of imaging dropped from 53 to 38% and average per-person spending on imaging dropped from $236 to $157. The discounted and undiscounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios indicated that ideal upfront imaging reduced costs and slightly improved health outcomes compared with current practice patterns, that is, guideline-concordant imaging was less costly and slightly more effective. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrates the potential reduction in cost through the correction of inappropriate imaging practices. These findings highlight an opportunity within the healthcare system to reduce unnecessary costs and overtreatment through guideline adherence.

BACKGROUND:The authors sought to study the risk factors associated with severe outcomes in hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients with cancer. METHODS:The authors queried the New York University Langone Medical Center's records for hospitalized patients who were polymerase chain reaction-positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2) and performed chart reviews on patients with cancer diagnoses to identify patients with active cancer and patients with a history of cancer. Descriptive statistics were calculated and multivariable logistic regression was used to determine associations between clinical, demographic, and laboratory characteristics with outcomes, including death and admission to the intensive care unit. RESULTS:A total of 4184 hospitalized SARS CoV-2+ patients, including 233 with active cancer, were identified. Patients with active cancer were more likely to die than those with a history of cancer and those without any cancer history (34.3% vs 27.6% vs 20%, respectively; P < .01). In multivariable regression among all patients, active cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.89; CI, 1.34-2.67; P < .01), older age (OR, 1.06; CI, 1.05-1.06; P < .01), male sex (OR for female vs male, 0.70; CI, 0.58-0.84; P < .01), diabetes (OR, 1.26; CI, 1.04-1.53; P = .02), morbidly obese body mass index (OR, 1.87; CI, 1.24-2.81; P < .01), and elevated D-dimer (OR, 6.41 for value >2300; CI, 4.75-8.66; P < .01) were associated with increased mortality. Recent cancer-directed medical therapy was not associated with death in multivariable analysis. Among patients with active cancer, those with a hematologic malignancy had the highest mortality rate in comparison with other cancer types (47.83% vs 28.66%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS:The authors found that patients with an active cancer diagnosis were more likely to die from COVID-19. Those with hematologic malignancies were at the highest risk of death. Patients receiving cancer-directed therapy within 3 months before hospitalization had no overall increased risk of death. LAY SUMMARY/UNASSIGNED:Our investigators found that hospitalized patients with active cancer were more likely to die from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) than those with a history of cancer and those without any cancer history. Patients with hematologic cancers were the most likely among patients with cancer to die from COVID-19. Patients who received cancer therapy within 3 months before hospitalization did not have an increased risk of death.

OBJECTIVE:To describe attitudes, perceptions, and beliefs related to smoking and smoking cessation among survivors of genitourinary cancers using a theory-based framework. METHODS:We performed a cross-sectional analysis of Wave III of the PATH study, a prospective cohort survey study assessing tobacco-use patterns and attitudes among a representative population-based sample of US adults. All adult current smokers with a history of urologic cancer were included. Primary outcomes were mapped to components of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and included: attempts to quit, readiness to quit, plan to quit, being told to quit, peers views toward smoking, regret about smoking, the perceived relationship between smoking and cancer/overall health. Secondary outcomes include: time to first cigarette, utilization of smoking cessation aids. Population weighted percentages with 95% confidence intervals were estimated. RESULTS:Our cohort represents a population estimate of 461,182 adult current smokers with a history of genitourinary cancer. The majority of respondents (90%) perceived smoking to be harmful to one's health and 83% were regretful about having started smoking. An equal proportion of respondents indicated that they were "very ready to quit," "somewhat ready to quit," or "not ready to quit." Among all respondents, 73% had been told by a physician to quit in the past year but only 7% indicated that they had used prescription medication and only 21% had used nicotine replacement therapy to help with smoking cessation. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There is significant variation in attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions related to smoking and smoking cessation among survivors of genitourinary malignancy. Patient-level smoking cessation interventions may need to be highly personalized for optimal success.