Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:As a secondary report to elucidate the diverse spectrum of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer around the globe, we present and discuss the comparisons of oncofertility practices for childhood cancer in limited versus optimum resource settings based on data collected in the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II. METHODS:We surveyed 39 oncofertility centers including 14 in limited resource settings from Africa, Asia, and Latin America (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I), and 25 in optimum resource settings from the USA, Europe, Australia, and Japan (Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part II). Survey questions covered the availability of fertility preservation and restoration options offered in case of childhood cancer as well as their degree of utilization. RESULTS:In the Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, responses for childhood cancer and calculated oncofertility scores showed the following characteristics: (1) higher oncofertility scores in optimum resource settings than in limited resource settings for ovarian and testicular tissue cryopreservation; (2) frequent utilization of gonadal shielding, fractionation of anticancer therapy, oophoropexy, and GnRH analogs; (3) promising utilization of oocyte in vitro maturation (IVM); and (4) rare utilization of neoadjuvant cytoprotective pharmacotherapy, artificial ovary, in vitro spermatogenesis, and stem cells reproductive technology as they are still in preclinical or early clinical research settings. CONCLUSIONS:Based on Repro-Can-OPEN Study Part I & II, we presented a plausible oncofertility best practice model to help optimize care for children with cancer in various resource settings. Special ethical concerns should be considered when offering advanced and innovative oncofertility options to children.

OBJECTIVE/UNASSIGNED:This study reports the feasibility, acceptability, and outcomes of a longitudinal, communication pilot intervention for patients with inherited cancer risk and their partners. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Couples were recruited through social media and snowball sampling. At Time 1 and 2, 15 couples completed a structured discussion task about family building concerns and decisions, followed by an online post-discussion questionnaire and dyadic interview to provide feedback about the experience. Interview data were analyzed to assess outcomes using applied thematic analysis. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Participants reported the intervention created an opportunity for honest disclosure of family building goals and concerns. Participants also stated the structured nature of the discussion task was useful and did not cause additional stress. The intervention ultimately aided at-risk patients and their partners to realize their concordant concerns, discover/confront discordant concerns, and mutually agree upon next steps. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This pilot intervention is feasible and acceptable. Furthermore, it offers a framework to facilitate effective communication about family building between patients with inherited cancer risk and their partners. INNOVATION/UNASSIGNED:This intervention is the first conversational tool designed for at-risk patients and their partners.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To design a replicable simulation curriculum collaboratively with the transgender and gender diverse community to improve clinician knowledge and comfort with providing reproductive care to this population. METHODS:This is a prospective, single arm pre-post analysis of obstetrics and gynecology residents at a single academic institution after completion of a novel simulation curriculum. The primary outcome was the change in resident comfort and knowledge in providing transgender and gender diverse patient care. A thematic analysis of learner and standardized patient free text responses was analyzed for insights on perceived learner experiences. RESULTS:This curriculum was created with iterative feedback from the transgender community and involved only transgender and gender diverse-identified standardized patients. Thirty residents participated, with 22 responding to both the pre-and post-curriculum surveys, and 11 responding to a 6-month post-curriculum survey. There were significant improvements in learner comfort and knowledge after participation that were found to persist at 6 months. Qualitative analysis demonstrated that this was a positive and powerful learning experience for both residents and standardized patients. CONCLUSIONS:This simulation curriculum may be an effective and impactful tool to increase trainee comfort and knowledge of transgender and gender diverse patient care, which is important given the lack of physician training in the care for these individuals. By building the foundation with resident learners, the ultimate goal is to enhance the pool of clinicians confident and capable of caring for transgender and gender diverse patients, to increase access to care, and to improve health outcomes in this vulnerable population.

The purpose of this study is to describe the context, curriculum design, and pilot evaluation of the educational program "Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Curricular Advances for Research and Education" (SGM Cancer CARE), a workshop for early-career researchers and healthcare providers interested in gaining knowledge and skills in sexual and gender minority (SGM) cancer research and healthcare advocacy. A needs assessment of a sample of clinicians and researchers (n = 104) and feedback from an Advisory Board informed the curriculum design of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Four SGM-tailored modules, focusing on epidemiology, clinical research, behavioral science and interventions, and community-based participatory approaches, were developed and tested in a 2.5-day virtual format among 19 clinicians and researchers. A fifth module to provide feedback to participants on brief presentations about their SGM cancer research ideas or related efforts was added later. A mixed-methods evaluation comprised of pre- and post-modular online evaluation surveys and virtual focus groups was used to determine the degree to which the workshop curriculum met participant needs. Compared to pre-module evaluations, participants reported a marked increase in SGM cancer research knowledge in post-module scores. Quantitative results were supported by our qualitative findings. In open field response survey questions and post-workshop focus groups, participants reported being extremely pleased with the content and delivery format of the SGM Cancer CARE workshop. Participants did regret not having the opportunity to connect with instructors, mentors, and colleagues in person. The SGM Cancer CARE curriculum was shown to increase the knowledge, skills, and level of preparedness of early-career clinicians and scientists to conduct culturally relevant and appropriate research needed to improve care for SGM persons across the cancer care continuum from prevention to survivorship.

Purpose/Objective(s): The LGBTQ community is an understudied and medically underserved population who experience increased cancer risk and worse cancer outcomes. Negative provider interactions, including discrimination and lack of knowledge regarding LGBTQ-specific health issues are cited by patients as barriers to care, including in radiation oncology (RO). Notably, little is known regarding LGBTQ knowledge and attitudes among RO residents (ROR) or LGBTQ-specific training in RO residency training programs. Thus, we sought to assess the extent of current LGBTQ-specific training in U.S. RO residency programs. Materials/Methods: Two published surveys of LGBTQ-education in residency were adapted to RO. The first assessed LGBTQ education from the perspective of program directors (PD) and associate PDs (APD), while the second survey was to RORs. The surveys were sent to all ACGME-accredited U.S. RO residency PD, APD, and program coordinators (PC), with the ROR survey being disseminated by the respective PCs. Each survey consisted of subsections of attitudes and knowledge in the care of LGBTQ patients, RO program characteristics, program inclusion of LGBTQ-specific education, and individual demographics.
Result(s): There were 69 responses (29 PD, APD and 40 ROR). The majority of respondents (PD, APD/ROR) identified as white (79%/58%), non-Hispanic (76%/72%), male (55%/55%), and heterosexual (86%/78%). The majority of PD, APDs did not receive LGBTQ education in medical school (60%) or residency training (96%), while the majority of residents (68%) did receive LGBTQ training in medical school; yet, both groups felt this training was insufficient to care for LGBTQ patients during residency (76%/68%). Overall, respondents felt comfortable treating LGB (90%/85%) and T (79%/62.5%) patients. However, the majority did not feel confident in their knowledge for LGB (52%/62.5%) or T (79%/85%) health needs. The majority of respondents' programs have never had a didactic session on LGBTQ health (78%/80%) resulting in 61%/61% of respondents feeling their program inadequately prepares residents to work confidently with LGBTQ patients. However, the majority felt their program is receptive to incorporating LGBTQ health content into their curriculum (75%/75%) and expressed a personal interest in such education (97%/80%). Additional data will be available by time of conference.
Conclusion(s): We found an increase of LGTBQ education in medical schools between PD, APD and ROR, suggestive of a recent improvement in LGBTQ content; yet most residency programs still lacked any LGBTQ-specific education. While the majority felt comfortable treating LGBTQ patients, they simultaneously lacked confidence in knowledge regarding LGBTQ health needs; yet, possessed desire for additional education and belief that such trainings should require. Conclusion is that residencies need to do a better job incorporating LGBTQ health content into their curricula, which is supported by interest from ROR and program leadership.
Copyright

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is currently linked to almost 35,000 new cases of cancer in women and men each year in the United States. Gardasil-9 (Merck & Company), the only HPV vaccine now available in the United States, is nearly 100% effective at preventing precancers caused by oncogenic HPV types. In the United States, however, only about one half of adolescents are up to date with HPV vaccination. It is well known that health care clinicians' recommendations play a significant role in parents' decisions regarding HPV vaccination. A growing body of literature examines specific communication strategies for promoting uptake of the HPV vaccine. A comprehensive review of the evidence for each of these strategies is needed. The authors searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Web of Science Complete databases for original articles with a defined clinician communication strategy and an outcome of HPV vaccine uptake or intention to vaccinate (PROSPERO registry no. CRD42020107602). In total, 46 studies were included. The authors identified two main strategies with strong evidence supporting their positive impact on vaccine uptake: strong recommendation and presumptive recommendation. Determinations about a causal relationship were limited by the small numbers of randomized controlled trials. There is also opportunity for more research to determine the effects of motivational interviewing and cancer-prevention messaging.

Among high-risk breast cancer (BC) survivors, genetic counseling (GC) and genetic testing (GT) may inform cascade testing and risk management. Compared to non-Hispanic White BC survivors, Spanish-preferring Latina BC survivors are less likely to report discussing GC with a healthcare provider. However, few studies have examined Latinas' experiences with GC/GT, particularly outside of the mainland USA. This study aimed to compare frequency of provider discussion of GC between Spanish-preferring Latina BC survivors living in Florida (FL) and Puerto Rico (PR). We conducted secondary data analysis of baseline assessments from a randomized pilot of an educational intervention for Spanish-preferring Latina BC survivors. Participants (N = 52) were GC/GT-naive, but met clinical criteria for GC/GT referral. Participants self-reported sociodemographic, clinical, and cultural variables, including previous provider discussion of GC. Descriptive statistics characterized frequency of GC discussion. Logistic regression examined the relationships between sociodemographic, clinical, and cultural characteristics and GC discussion. Only 31% of participants reported previous GC discussion. More participants from PR reported having GC discussions (43% vs. 21% in the mainland USA). In multivariable analyses, greater likelihood of GC discussion was associated with PR (vs. mainland USA) residence (odds ratio [OR] = 6.00, p = .03), older age at baseline (OR = 1.19, p = .04), and younger age at BC diagnosis (OR = 0.80, p = .03). Few high-risk Spanish-preferring Latina BC survivors in the mainland USA and PR had discussed GC with their providers. These results highlight a gap in the implementation of evidence-based genetics guidelines. Provider-directed interventions may be needed to increase uptake of GC/GT among Latina BC survivors.

Objective: To systematically review and summarize the literaure on nongenetic risk factors that may contribute to the racial disparity in uterine fibroids (UF) that disproportionality impacts Black individuals at 2-3 times the rate of White individuals and how the racial disparity has been studied to date. Evidence Review: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol checklist guided the systematic review process. From January 1 to June 1, 2021, relevant articles were retrieved from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Multiple investigators screened, assessed, extracted, and critically appraised the data. Results: A total of 44 articles examined the relationship among UFs, race/ethnicity, and nongenetic risk factors, including cardiometabolic features, comorbidities, diet, chemical exposures, vitamin D levels, reproductive characteristics and socioeconomic factors, and life experiences. Most studies reported on the same 3 cohort study populations, and there was inconsistent statistical reporting of the race/ethnicity, risk factors, and UF relationship. Conclusion: Many potential risk factors related to the racial disparity in UF have been studied thus far. There is still little conclusive evidence regarding which risk factors are the greatest contributors to racial disparities in UF. Promising areas of research deserve greater attention and a greater diversity of study populations and analytical methods.