Search

Background: Prostate cancer affects African American men disproportionately compared with men of other racial/ethnic groups. To identify biological bases for this health disparity, we sought to create a state-wide biobank of African American prostate cancer survivors in Florida. Methods: African American men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2013 and 2017 and living in Florida at diagnosis were identified through the State of Florida's cancer registry. Individuals were approached via mail and telephone, assessed for eligibility, and asked for informed consent. χ2 and t tests were conducted to identify differences between eligible and reachable individuals (i.e., had valid contact information) versus consented participants. Results: Of the 5,960 eligible and reachable individuals, 3,904 were eligible and contacted at least once, and 578 consented [overall consent rate = 10% (578/5,960); adjusted consent rate = 15% (578/3,904)]. Statistically significant (Ps < 0.05) but small differences in demographic and clinical variables were observed. Consented participants were less likely to be older than 64 (35% vs. 41%) and less likely to have received radiotherapy (36% vs. 41%) and hormone therapy (16% vs. 21%), but more likely to have regional prostate cancer (13% vs. 11%) and have undergone surgery (44% vs. 39%). Consented participants did not differ from reachable individuals on other demographic and clinical factors (Ps > 0.05). Conclusions: Recruiting African American prostate cancer survivors to biobanking research through a cancer registry is feasible. However, the consent rate was low, and existing challenges limit consent and participation. Impact: Strategies for overcoming barriers to informed consent and increasing participation in biospecimen research are needed to address cancer disparities.

Vaccine hesitancy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major public health concern in the US. Cancer patients are especially vulnerable to adverse COVID-19 outcomes and require targeted prevention efforts against COVID-19.We used longitudinal survey data from patients seen at Moffitt Cancer Center to identify attitudes, beliefs, and sociodemographic factors associated with COVID-19 vaccination acceptance among cancer patients. Patients with confirmed invasive cancer diagnosis through Cancer Registry data were asked about vaccine acceptance through the question "Now that a COVID-19 vaccine is available, are you likely to get it?" and dichotomized into high accepters (already received it, would get it when available) and low accepters (waiting for a doctor to recommend it, waiting until more people received it, not likely to get it).Most patients (86.8% of 5,814) were high accepters of the COVID-19 vaccine. High accepters had more confidence in the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine than low accepters. Multivariable logistic regression showed older individuals (70-89 vs.18-49: OR:2.57, 95% CI:1.33-4.86), those with greater perceived severity of COVID-19 infection (very serious vs. not at all serious: OR:2.55, 95% CI:1.76-3.70), practicing more risk mitigation behaviors (per one standard deviation OR:1.75, 95% CI:1.57-1.95), and history of receiving the flu shot versus not (OR:6.56, 95% CI:5.25-8.20) had higher odds of vaccine acceptance. Individuals living with more than one other person (vs. alone: OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35, 0.79) and those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged (per 10 percentile points: OR: 0.89, 95 %CI: 0.85, 0.93) had lower odds of reporting vaccine acceptance.Most patients with cancer have or would receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Those who are less likely to accept the vaccine have more concerns regarding effectiveness and side effects, are younger, more socioeconomically disadvantaged, and have lower perceptions of COVID-19 severity.

Patients with gynecologic malignancies commonly experience distressing symptoms during chemotherapy. This study sought to evaluate whether symptoms accumulated over the course of several chemotherapy cycles, which could provide essential information for planning supportive interventions.Patients with gynecologic malignancies completed questionnaires about fatigue, depressive symptoms, sleep, and physical activity 1 week before and after chemotherapy cycles 1, 3, and 6. Multilevel models examined the effects of time (pre- and postchemotherapy), treatment cycle (1, 3, 6), and their interaction on symptoms. Logistic regression models examined the effects of time, treatment cycle, and their interaction on the proportion of participants exceeding thresholds for clinically meaningful symptomatology.Most participants (Patients with gynecologic malignancies have high rates of clinically meaningful symptomatology during chemotherapy. Patients may experience a cumulative burden of symptomatology as treatment progresses, which could have therapeutic implications. Early implementation of supportive interventions should be considered to prevent or mitigate cumulative treatment burden. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Previous research suggests that inflammation triggers cancer-treatment-related symptoms (i.e., fatigue, depression, and disruptions in sleep and physical activity), but evidence is mixed. This study examined relationships between inflammatory biomarkers and symptoms in patients with gynecologic cancer compared to age-matched women with no cancer history (i.e., controls). Patients (n = 121) completed assessments before chemotherapy cycles 1, 3, and 6, and 6 and 12 months later. Controls (n = 105) completed assessments at similar timepoints. Changes in inflammation and symptomatology were evaluated using random-effects mixed models, and cross-sectional differences between patients and controls in inflammatory biomarkers and symptoms were evaluated using least squares means. Associations among inflammatory biomarkers and symptoms were evaluated using random-effects fluctuation mixed models. The results indicated that compared to controls, patients typically have higher inflammatory biomarkers (i.e., TNF-alpha, TNFR1, TNFR2, CRP, IL-1ra) and worse fatigue, depression, and sleep (ps < 0.05). Patients reported lower levels of baseline physical activity (p = 0.02) that became more similar to controls over time. Significant associations were observed between CRP, depression, and physical activity (ps < 0.05), but not between inflammation and other symptoms. The results suggest that inflammation may not play a significant role in fatigue or sleep disturbance among gynecologic cancer patients but may contribute to depression and physical inactivity.

The field of radionuclide therapy (RNT) for prostate cancer (PC) is growing rapidly, with recent Food and Drug Administration approval of the first 177Lu-PSMA ligand. We aimed to develop the first patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure for PC patients receiving RNT. Methods: We identified relevant symptoms and toxicities by reviewing published trials and interviews with PC patients receiving RNT (n = 29), caregivers (n = 14), and clinicians (n = 11). Second, we selected items for measure inclusion. Third, we refined the item list with input from experts in RNTs and PROs. Fourth, we finalized the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Radionuclide Therapy (FACT-RNT) with patient input. Results: This multistep process yielded a brief 15-item measure deemed by key stakeholders to be relevant and useful in the context of RNT for PC. Conclusion: The FACT-RNT is a new standardized tool to monitor relevant symptoms and toxicities among PC patients in RNT trials and real-world settings.

We aimed to identify patient-level demographic and behavioral characteristics associated with higher social isolation among patients with cancer throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.Moffitt Cancer Center patients seen on or after January 1, 2015, had a last known alive vital status, a valid e-mail address, and were 18-89 years old, were emailed a survey regarding social isolation. We collected information on age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status, smoking, self-reported cancer diagnosis, cancer treatment, and perceived life changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We calculated a COVID-19 risk mitigation score by summing the frequency of risk mitigation behaviors (e.g., mask wearing). Social isolation was assessed with the self-reported Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Social Isolation Short Form. Logistic regression models compared characteristics of participants reporting higher versus lower social isolation (T-scores60 vs. ≤60).Most participants (N = 9,579) were female (59.2%), White (93.0%), and non-Hispanic (92.5%). Participants at greater odds of higher social isolation were younger (per 10 years decrease odds ratio [OR] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval, CI [1.30, 1.43]), female (vs. male OR = 1.54, 95% CI [1.36, 1.74]), unmarried (vs. married OR = 1.83, 95% CI [1.62, 2.08]), current smokers (vs. never OR = 2.38, 95% CI [1.88, 3.00]), reporting more risk mitigation behaviors (per 1 SD; OR = 1.33, 95% CI [1.24, 1.42]), and more perceived life changes (vs. little/no change; OR = 2.64, 95% CI [2.08, 3.35]).We identified younger age, females, unmarried, current smokers, more risk mitigation behaviors, and more perceived life changes increased odds of social isolation for patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This can inform identification of patients with cancer at higher risk of social isolation for targeted mitigation strategies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Background Cigarette smoking is related to greater cancer incidence, worse cancer-related clinical outcomes, and worse patient quality of life. Few studies have evaluated the role of smoking in patients’ experiences of cancer-related symptom burden. This study examined relationships between smoking and total symptom burden as well as the incidence of severe symptoms among adult cancer patients. Patients and Methods Patients at Moffitt Cancer Center completed self-report surveys as part of routine cancer care. Symptom burden was evaluated as the sum of individual symptom ratings (total symptom burden) and the number of symptoms rated severe (incidence of severe symptoms). Zero-inflated negative binomial modeling was used to evaluate the relationships between smoking status (ever vs never smoker) and symptom burden outcomes controlling for relevant sociodemographic and clinical covariates and accounting for the proportion of participants reporting no symptom burden. Results This study included 12 571 cancer patients. More than half reported a history of cigarette smoking (n = 6771, 55%). Relative to never smokers, participants with a smoking history had 15% worse expected total symptom burden (ratio = 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.20, P < .001) and 13% more expected severe symptoms (ratio = 1.13, 95% CI 1.05-1.21, P = .001) above and beyond the effects of relevant sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Conclusion Results provide support that smoking is associated with worse cancer symptom burden. More research is needed to evaluate how smoking history (ie, current vs former smoker) and smoking cessation influence cancer symptom burden.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The study objective was to determine whether longitudinal changes in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were associated with survival among early-stage, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients undergoing stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were obtained from January 2015 through March 2020. We ran a joint probability model to assess the relationship between time-to-death, and longitudinal PRO measurements. PROs were measured through the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS). We controlled for other covariates likely to affect symptom burden and survival including stage, tumor diameter, comorbidities, gender, race/ethnicity, relationship status, age, and smoking status. RESULTS: The sample included 510 early-stage NSCLC patients undergoing SBRT. The median age was 73.8 (range: 46.3–94.6). The survival component of the joint model demonstrates that longitudinal changes in ESAS scores are significantly associated with worse survival (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.02–1.05). This finding suggests a one-unit increase in ESAS score increased probability of death by 4%. Other factors significantly associated with worse survival included older age (HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 1.03–1.05), larger tumor diameter (HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.01–1.46), male gender (HR: 1.87; 95% CI: 1.36–2.57), and current smoking status (HR: 2.39; 95% CI: 1.25–4.56). CONCLUSION: PROs are increasingly being collected as a part of routine care delivery to improve symptom management. Healthcare systems can integrate these data with other real-world data to predict patient outcomes, such as survival. Capturing longitudinal PROs—in addition to PROs at diagnosis—may add prognostic value for estimating survival among early-stage NSCLC patients undergoing SBRT.

Purpose: Identifying clinically relevant comorbidities and their effect on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes among men with advanced prostate cancer (APC) can inform patient care and improve outcomes; however, this is poorly understood. The aim of this observational study was to examine the prevalence of comorbidities, and the relationship of comorbidity burden to HRQoL and other patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among men with APC. Methods: Participants were 192 men (average age 68.8) with APC (stage III or IV) who completed a psychosocial battery including measures of sociodemographic factors, HRQoL and other PROs, and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Hierarchical multiple regression analysis was used to examine the relationships between CCI, HRQOL, and PROs. Results: The vast majority (82%) of participants had at least one comorbidity, with the most common being: hypertension (59%), connective tissue disease or arthritis (31%), diabetes (24%), and problems with kidneys, vision, or another organ (24%). After controlling for covariates, regressions showed that a higher CCI score was significantly associated with worse HRQoL (p < 0.001), lower levels of positive affect (p < 0.05), and higher levels of depression (p < 0.05), fatigue (p < 0.001), pain (p < 0.01), stress (p < 0.01), and cancer-specific distress (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Comorbidities were common among men with APC, and a greater CCI score was associated with detriments in several domains of HRQoL and other PROs. Our findings show the need to address comorbidities in the presence of a cancer diagnosis and subsequent treatment.

Chimeric antigen receptor T-cells and other immunotherapies have markedly changed the paradigm of treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies. While notable in efficacy, immunotherapy is characterized by a significant possibility of life-threatening side effects. Consequently, patients are often required to have informal family caregivers present and to stay near the treating center for several weeks after cell infusion. Further, the responsibility of managing a great deal of physical care and emotional support falls to these caregivers. Given the novelty of immunotherapy treatment, there is a need to better understand the psychosocial experience of patients receiving this treatment and their caregivers. This article describes the psychosocial characteristics of patients undergoing cellular immunotherapies and their caregivers across time, including patient/caregiver distress, coping, and caregiver burden and preparedness.

PURPOSE: There has been limited study of the implementation of suicide risk screening for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) as a part of routine care. To address this gap, this study assessed oncology providers' and professionals' perspectives about barriers and facilitators of implementing a suicide risk screening among patients with HNC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients with HNC with an in-person visit completed a suicide risk screening on an electronic tablet. Patients reporting passive death wish were then screened for active suicidal ideation and referred for appropriate intervention. Interviews were conducted with 25 oncology providers and professionals who played a key role in implementation including nurses, medical assistants, patient access representatives, advanced practice providers, physicians, social workers, and informatics staff. The interview guide was based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed for themes. RESULTS: Participants identified multilevel implementation barriers, such as intervention level (eg, patient difficulty with using a tablet), process level (eg, limited nursing engagement), organizational level (eg, limited clinic Wi-Fi connectivity), and individual level (eg, low clinician self-efficacy for interpreting and acting upon patient-reported outcome scores). Participants noted facilitators, such as effective care coordination across nursing and social work staff and the opportunity for patients to be screened multiple times. Participants recommended strengthening patient and clinician education and providing patients with other modalities for data entry (eg, desktop computer in the waiting room). CONCLUSION: Participants identified important intervention modifications that may be needed to optimize suicide risk screening in cancer care settings.

Background Trials of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have published patient-reported quality of life (QOL), but the size and heterogeneity of this literature can make patient education difficult. This meta-analysis aimed to describe change in QOL and symptomatology in patients receiving ICIs for cancer. Methods Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, databases were searched through November 2019 for articles or abstracts of prospective, original studies reporting longitudinal QOL in adult cancer patients treated with ICIs. The prespecified primary outcomes were change in global QOL among patients treated with ICIs and difference in change since baseline in global QOL between patients treated with ICI vs non-ICI active treatment. Secondary outcomes included physical functioning and symptomatology. All statistical tests were 2-sided. Results Of 20 323 publications, 26 met inclusion criteria. Global QOL did not change over time in patients treated with ICIs (k = 26, n = 6974; P = .19). Larger improvements in global QOL was observed in patients receiving ICI vs non-ICI regimens (k = 16, ICI: n = 3588; non-ICI: n = 2948; P Conclusions This study is among the first to quantitatively summarize QOL in patients treated with ICIs. Findings suggest ICI recipients report no change in global QOL and higher QOL than patients treated with non-ICI regimens.

Cognitive behavioral stress management (CBSM) improves quality of life and mitigates stress biology in patients with early-stage cancer, including men with localized prostate cancer. However, treatments for advanced prostate cancer like androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) can lead to significant symptom burden that may be further exacerbated by stress-induced inflammation and cortisol dysregulation. The aim of this study was to examine the effects of CBSM (versus an active health promotion control) on circulating inflammatory markers and cortisol in men with advanced prostate cancer. Methods: Men with stage III or IV prostate cancer (N = 192) who had undergone ADT within the last year were randomized to CBSM or health promotion. Both interventions were 10 weeks, group-based, and delivered online. Venous blood was drawn at baseline, 6 months, and 12 months to measure circulating levels of CRP, IL-6, IL8, IL-10, and TNF-α. Saliva samples were collected at awakening, 30 minutes after awakening, evening, and night for two consecutive days at baseline, 6-months, and 12-months to measure diurnal cortisol slopes. Results: Mixed modeling analyses demonstrated that changes in inflammatory markers and cortisol did not differ by intervention. Men in both CBSM and health promotion showed decreases in IL-10, IL-8, and TNF-α from baseline to 6 months (β=−3.85–5.04, p’s=.004–

Background Cyclin‐dependent kinase 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor targeted therapies dramatically improve survival outcomes for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), but they are associated with significant symptom burden that can impact patients’ health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) and treatment outcomes. This study is the first to describe CDK4/6 inhibitor symptoms from the lived perspectives of MBC patients taking CDK4/6 inhibitors and healthcare providers involved in MBC care. This study also explored patients’ symptom management and HRQOL concerns, and gathered feedback about developing supportive interventions for MBC. Methods MBC patients taking CDK4/6 inhibitors (N = 20) and MBC healthcare providers (N = 12) participated in semi‐structured interviews that were analyzed for qualitative themes. MBC patients completed surveys about HRQOL, symptoms, and unmet needs. Results Patient and provider perceptions of CDK4/6 inhibitor symptoms did not align with patients perceiving symptoms as more burdensome. Patients reported that supportive resources (e.g., support groups, blogs) that are not specific to MBC do not adequately meet their needs. Patients and providers were enthusiastic about developing supportive interventions specifically for MBC and offered considerations for designing such interventions. Conclusions Findings highlight differences in perceptions of CDK4/6 inhibitor symptom burden between MBC patients and providers. Results will inform the development of supportive interventions to assist MBC patients in managing CDK4/6 inhibitor symptom burden and maintaining HRQOL. Such interventions could also improve treatment outcomes., Metastatic breast cancer (MBC) patient and provider perceptions of symptoms associated with CDK4/6 inhibitor did not align, with patients perceiving symptoms as more burdensome. Patients reported that supportive resources (e.g., support groups, blogs) that are not specific to MBC do not adequately meet their needs, however patients and providers were enthusiastic about developing supportive interventions specifically for MBC and offered considerations for designing such interventions. Results will inform the development of supportive interventions to assist MBC patients in managing CDK4/6 inhibitor symptom burden and maintaining health‐related quality of life.

This study aimed to (1) develop TOGETHER-YA, an e-Health-delivered and group-based health-related quality of life (HRQOL) intervention for young adult (YA) cancer survivors aged 18-39 (Part 1), and (2) determine its initial feasibility and acceptability in a single-arm pilot trial (Part 2).TOGETHER-YA is a manualized, 10-week intervention for YA survivors that includes elements of relaxation training, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and health education. In Part 1, content was adapted from existing evidence-based interventions with feedback from YAs (N = 22) in four iterative focus groups. In Part 2, YA survivors (N = 11) participated in a single-arm pilot trial of TOGETHER-YA. Intervention groups were led by a trained facilitator over videoconference. Primary outcomes were feasibility (i.e., recruitment, session attendance, retention) and acceptability (i.e., participant satisfaction).Focus groups reacted positively to TOGETHER-YA and provided actionable recommendations for enhancing its relevance and acceptability, which were implemented. In initial testing, all feasibility and acceptability benchmarks were met; 58% of eligible YAs were recruited, participants attended M = 6 intervention sessions (SD = 3), and 82% of participants were retained post-intervention. On average, participants "agreed" to "strongly agreed" with positive statements about the weekly sessions and the overall program.TOGETHER-YA was developed in collaboration with YA cancer survivors and found to be feasible and acceptable in initial testing. TOGETHER-YA is the first HRQOL intervention for a broad range of YA survivors that is eHealth-delivered for convenience and group-based for peer support. Future large-scale trials should test its efficacy for improving HRQOL.NCT05048316, September 17, 2021; NCT05054569, September 23, 2021.

Background: Patients with cancer require timely access to care so that healthcare providers can prepare an optimal treatment plan with significant implications for quality of life and mortality. The COVID-19 pandemic spurred rapid adoption of telemedicine in oncology, but study of patient experience of care with telemedicine in this population has been limited. We assessed overall patient experience of care with telemedicine at an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic and examined changes in patient experience over time. Patients and Methods: This was a retrospective study of outpatient oncology patients who received treatment at Moffitt Cancer Center. Press Ganey surveys were used to assess patient experience. Data from patients with appointments between April 1, 2020, and June 30, 2021, were analyzed. Patient experience was compared between telemedicine and in-person visits, and patient experience with telemedicine over time was described. Results: A total of 33,318 patients reported Press Ganey data for in-person visits, and 5,950 reported Press Ganey data for telemedicine visits. Relative to patients with in-person visits, more patients with telemedicine visits gave higher satisfaction ratings for access (62.5% vs 75.8%, respectively) and care provider concern (84.2% vs 90.7%, respectively) (PPP>.05). Conclusions: In this study, a large oncology dataset showed that telemedicine resulted in better patient experience of care in terms of access and care provider concern compared with in-person visits. Patient experience of care with telemedicine visits did not change over time, suggesting that implementing telemedicine was effective.

Background: In the past decade, colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality rates have increased among young adults (YAs) 18-39 years old. Cancer can be uniquely challenging for YAs, as common cancer-related life disruptions co-occur with rapid social and emotional development and can contribute to low health-related quality of life (HRQOL), or overall well-being. The goal of this study was to examine HRQOL at several timepoints among YA CRC patients enrolled in the multi-site ColoCare Study and compare HRQOL between YA and older adult CRC patients. Methods: ColoCare is a large cohort study of newly diagnosed CRC patients. Participants complete patient-reported outcomes (PRO) surveys and provide biomarker samples prospectively from the time of diagnosis until 24 months (m). This analysis leveraged PRO data collected across six ColoCare sites at baseline (enrollment), 3m, 6m, 12m, and 24m. HRQOL was assessed with the EORTC-QLQ C30, which includes a global QOL subscale, five functional subscales (physical, role, emotional, cognitive, social), and nine symptom subscales (fatigue, nausea/vomiting, pain, dyspnea, insomnia, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). Age at diagnosis was categorized as YA (18-39 years old), average onset (AO; 40-64 years old), or late onset (LO; ≥65 years old). T-tests were used to compare HRQOL scores between age groups at each timepoint. Results: The sample included n=87 YA (5%), n=873 AO (52%), and n=712 LO (43%) CRC patients. YA CRC patients were an average of 33.75 years old (SD=4.73) and most were female (53%), White (80%), and diagnosed with stage III or IV CRC (59%). Relative to AO CRC patients, YAs reported better physical function at baseline (p=0.014) and 24m (p=0.044), less fatigue at 24m (p=0.027), and better global QOL at 24m (p=0.004). Relative to LO patients, YAs reported better global QOL at baseline (p=0.039) and 24m (p=0.001), better physical function at baseline (p Conclusion: Across the first two years post-CRC diagnosis, YA patients reported better HRQOL than AO and LO patients in several domains, including better physical function, less fatigue, and better global QOL. However, YAs also reported worse financial difficulties, worse social and emotional function, and worse nausea/vomiting and appetite loss relative to LO patients. These findings suggest the need for age-specific emotional, social, and symptom management support for YA CRC patients. Citation Format: Amanda Michelle Bloomer, Gillian Trujillo, Maria Gomez, Xiaoyin Li, Heather S. Jim, Jennifer Ose, Jane C. Figueiredo, Adetunji Toriola, Christopher I. Li, David Shibata, Cornelia M. Ulrich, Martin Schneider, Biljana Gigic, Laura B. Oswald, Erin M. Siegel. Health-related quality of life among newly diagnosed young adult colorectal cancer patients: results from the ColoCare Study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 1 (Regular and Invited Abstracts); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(7_Suppl):Abstract nr 3049.

Background Sleep disturbance is common and distressing among cancer survivors. Black breast cancer survivors (BBCS) suffer disproportionately from sleep disturbance, yet there is limited research on how to address this issue. Purpose This study aimed to understand the multifaceted experiences of sleep disturbance among BBCS and how to culturally target a mobile health (mHealth) intervention to improve sleep outcomes in BBCS. Methods Semi-structured interviews were conducted in a purposive sample of 10 BBCS. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded for key barriers to sleep and potential solutions to incorporate into behavioral interventions using NVivo 12. Inductive applied thematic analysis techniques were employed to identify emergent themes. Results Ten BBCS (mean age = 54, SD = 10) described their experiences of sleep disturbance with themes including: (1) barriers to quality sleep (e.g., cancer worry, personal responsibilities), (2) psychosocial impacts of sleep disturbance (e.g., fatigue, distress), and (3) commonly used strategies to improve sleep. The second section discusses suggestions for developing mHealth interventions to improve sleep for BBCS including: (1) feedback on an existing mHealth intervention and (2) intervention topics suggested by BBCS. Conclusions Our findings highlight the challenges associated with sleep disturbance in BBCS. Participants report culturally targeted mHealth interventions are needed for BBCS who experience chronic sleep disturbance that affects their overall quality of life. These interventions should address coping with sleep-related issues relevant to many breast cancer survivors and BBCS (e.g., sexual intimacy, fear of cancer recurrence) and should incorporate intervention strategies acceptable to BBCS (e.g., prayer, meditation).

Background: Clinicians must closely monitor patients for toxicities after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (e.g., toxicities, quality of life) and activity data (e.g., steps, sleep) may complement clinicians’ observations. This study tested the feasibility and acceptability of collecting PROs and activity data from patients with hematologic malignancies during CAR-T and explored preliminary data patterns. Methods: Participants wore a Fitbit tracker and completed PROs at several timepoints through 90-days post-infusion. Feasibility was assessed with a priori benchmarks for recruitment (≥50%), retention (≥70%), PRO completion (≥70%), and days wearing the Fitbit (≥50%). Acceptability was assessed with participant satisfaction (a priori benchmark > 2 on a 0–4 scale). Results: Participants (N = 12) were M = 66 years old (SD = 7). Rates of recruitment (68%), retention (83%), PRO completion (85%), and days wearing the Fitbit (85%) indicated feasibility. Satisfaction with completing the PROs (M = 3.2, SD = 0.5) and wearing the Fitbit (M = 2.9, SD = 0.5) indicated acceptability. Preliminary data patterns suggested that participants with better treatment response (vs. progressive disease) had a higher toxicity burden. Conclusions: Longitudinal PRO and activity data collection was feasible and acceptable. Data collected on a larger scale may be used to specify risk prediction models to identify predictors of severe CAR-T-related toxicities and inform early interventions.

This study aimed to describe considerations for developing supportive care interventions targeted to head and neck cancer (HNC) survivors.One-time semi-structured interviews (N = 33) were conducted with HNC survivors who had recently finished treatment (n = 20) and HNC providers (e.g., physicians, nurses; n = 13). Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded using inductive applied thematic analysis techniques to identify themes.HNC survivors (75% male; M = 61 years old) and providers (54% physicians; 62% female) were unanimously supportive of developing HNC-specific supportive care interventions. Participants described potential benefits of offering interventions at various points throughout the HNC treatment and survivorship trajectory rather than at a single critical time. Many participants preferred group-based interventions because of the high value of peer-support. Others described how group interventions may not be appropriate for all HNC survivors due to risks for negative social comparisons and exacerbated anxiety. Participants suggested topics that should be addressed in HNC-specific interventions including education about acute and long-term side effects, symptom management, nutritional support, relationship/social role changes, grief/loss, and fear of recurrence.HNC-specific supportive care interventions are critically needed, as survivors experience persistent symptoms and distinct psychosocial concerns that impact quality of life. Findings from this study can inform the development of supportive care interventions targeted to the unique psychosocial concerns of HNC survivors.

Background Patients with advanced head and neck cancer have identified pain, fatigue, and difficulties swallowing, breathing, and communicating as high‐priority disease‐related symptoms. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy‐Head and Neck Symptom Index‐10 (FHNSI‐10) assesses these symptoms. We sought to validate the FHNSI‐10, another brief symptom index (FHNSI‐7), and individual symptom endpoints representing these high‐rated priority disease symptoms among patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). Methods Patients (N = 239) were enrolled in a phase III randomized clinical trial (E1302) and completed the FHNSI‐10 at multiple time points. We assessed the internal consistencies and test–retest reliabilities of the FHNSI‐10 and FHNSI‐7 scores, and the known‐groups validity, predictive criterion validity, and responsiveness‐to‐change of the symptom indexes and individual symptom endpoint scores. Results The FHNSI‐10 and FHNSI‐7 indexes showed satisfactory internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha coefficient range 0.60‐0.75) and acceptable test–retest reliabilities (intraclass correlation coefficients = 0.75 and 0.74, respectively). The FHNSI‐10, FHNSI‐7, and the pain, fatigue, swallowing, and breathing symptom scores showed evidence of known‐groups validity by performance status at baseline. The FHNSI‐10, FHNSI‐7, and the pain, fatigue, and breathing symptom scores at baseline showed evidence of predictive criterion validity for overall survival, but not time‐to‐progression (TTP). Changes in the symptom indexes and individual symptom scores were not associated with changes in performance status over 4 weeks, though most patients had stable performance status. Conclusions There is initial evidence of validity for the FHNSI‐10 and FHNSI‐7 indexes and selected individual symptom endpoints as brief disease‐related symptom assessments for patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN., The patient‐centered FHNSI‐10 and FHNSI‐7 symptom indexes show evidence of validity and reliability for use among patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Individual symptom endpoints (1‐2 items each) are also valid for assessing pain, fatigue, swallowing, and breathing in this population.

Objective Metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) patients often make complicated treatment decisions, yet decision aids to facilitate shared decision-making for mPCa are uncommon. To inform the development of patient-centered mPCa decision aids, we examined what mPCa survivors considered most important when making treatment decisions. Methods Using an exploratory sequential approach, we conducted three focus groups with 14 advanced prostate cancer survivors (n=5, n=3, n=6 in each group) to identify considerations for making treatment decisions. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed, and we identified qualitative themes. We then developed a quantitative survey to assess the importance of each theme and administered the survey to mPCa survivors (N=100). We used relative frequencies to determine the most strongly endorsed items and chi-squared and Fisher's exact tests to assess associations with participant characteristics. Results Focus groups yielded 11 themes, and the resulting survey included 20 items. The most strongly endorsed mPCa treatment considerations were: relying on physician's treatment recommendations (79% strongly agree); wanting to feel well enough to spend quality time with loved ones (72% strongly agree); the importance of dying in a manner consistent with one's wishes (70% strongly agree); hoping to eliminate cancer completely (68% strongly agree); and optimizing treatment efficacy (65% strongly agree). Age, race, marital status, employment status, and self-reported health were related to how strongly men endorsed various considerations for mPCa treatment decision-making. Conclusion We identified multiple considerations that mPCa survivors appraised when making treatment decisions. These data may inform the development of patient-centered decision aids for mPCa.

Poor medication adherence is associated with reduced drug effectiveness, poor health-related quality of life, increased morbidity and mortality, and increased healthcare utilization and cost. Including the patient's voice is essential in understanding barriers to adherence. Useful patient-reported adherence measures are brief, inexpensive, non-invasive; can indicate barriers to adherence; and can be incorporated in electronic health records. The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) includes high-quality, freely available patient-reported measures covering many important constructs in patient-centered research but does not include a medication adherence measure. To fill this gap, we developed the PROMIS Medication Adherence Scale (PMAS) using the rigorous PROMIS instrument development guidelines. To develop the PMAS, we first conducted a review of the reviews, which enabled us to identify content areas relevant to medication adherence behavior. Then, we conducted qualitative research to elicit patients' views of and experiences with medication adherence. This process identified the following important content areas to guide item writing: extent medication is taken, knowledge of medication regimen, beliefs about medication, remembering to take medication, skipping due to side effects, skipping due to feeling better, and cost of medications. Based on the results of these activities, we wrote items and aimed to retain 1-2 items per content area. The final item set included 9 total adherence items, which were then refined through intensive comprehension and translatability review, as well as cognitive interviews. Future steps include testing the PMAS's validity.

BACKGROUND: Latina breast cancer survivors (BCS) often report poorer health-related quality of life (HRQOL), higher symptom burden, and greater psychosocial needs compared to non-Latina BCS. However, Latinas are underrepresented in cancer survivorship research and more work is needed to examine the factors contributing to these psychosocial disparities. This study aimed to evaluate potentially modifiable patient characteristics associated with HRQOL, breast cancer concerns, and cancer-specific distress among Latina BCS. METHODS: Baseline data was evaluated in 95 Latina BCS who participated in a smartphone-based psychosocial intervention designed to improve HRQOL. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were conducted to evaluate the associations between modifiable factors that have been shown to favorably impact outcomes in cancer populations (i.e., cancer-relevant self-efficacy, breast cancer knowledge) with overall and domain-specific HRQOL, breast cancer symptom burden, and cancer-specific distress, after controlling for sociodemographic and cancer-related characteristics. RESULTS: Greater cancer-relevant self-efficacy was related to better overall HRQOL as well as better social, emotional, and functional well-being domains. Greater cancer-relevant self-efficacy was also related to less breast cancer symptom burden and less cancer-specific distress. Breast cancer knowledge was not associated with any of the study outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Results demonstrate that cancer-relevant self-efficacy is a significant correlate of general and domain-specific HRQOL, breast cancer symptom burden, and cancer-specific distress among Latina BCS. Future interventions in this population should target cancer-relevant self-efficacy as a possible mechanism to improve HRQOL outcomes and survivorship experiences for Latina BCS.

The increasing use of eHealth has ushered in a new era of patient-centred cancer care that moves beyond the traditional in-person care model to real-time, dynamic, and technology-assisted assessments and interventions. eHealth has the potential to better the delivery of cancer care through improved patient–provider communication, enhanced symptom and toxicity assessment and management, and optimised patient engagement across the cancer care continuum. In this Review, we provide a brief, narrative appraisal of the peer reviewed literature over the past 10 years related to the uses of patient-centred eHealth to improve cancer care delivery. These uses include the addressal of symptom management, health-related quality of life, and other patient-reported outcomes across cancer care. In addition, we discuss the challenges of, and opportunities for, accessibility, scalability, and implementation of these technologies, important areas for further development, and future research directions.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among Latina women, and Latina women are at higher risk for breast cancer mortality than white women. Lifestyle factors, such as consuming a nutritious diet and engaging in regular physical activity, promote health and are protective against heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and breast cancer recurrence. Previous studies have developed and tested interventions for Latina breast cancer survivors to improve diet and increase physical activity, however, no studies to date have developed a smartphone delivered intervention. The purpose of the current study was to compare two Smartphone delivered interventions, My Health, which focused on diet and physical activity, and My Guide, which focused on psychosocial functioning, on dietary and physical activity outcomes, post-intervention, and at a two-week follow-up assessment. Overall, participants receiving the My Health intervention reported a greater reduction in daily fat sources than the My Guide group over time. However, daily sources of fat did not differ between conditions. Walking, measured by estimated weekly metabolic equivalents (METs), increased across time points in both groups. These preliminary findings suggest that eHealth interventions aimed at improving lifestyle factors may favorably impact nutritional intake and physical activity. Future research should utilize more comprehensive and objective measures of diet and physical activity, and incorporate more behavioral lifestyle components into the intervention in larger samples with a longer follow-up period.

BACKGROUND: Men with advanced prostate cancer (APC) face multiple challenges including poor prognosis, poor health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and elevated symptom burden. This study sought to establish the efficacy of a tablet-delivered, group- based psychosocial intervention for improving HRQOL and reducing symptom burden in men with APC. We hypothesized that men randomized to cognitive-behavioral stress management (CBSM) would report improved HRQOL and reduced symptom burden relative to men randomized to an active control health promotion (HP) condition. Condition effects on intervention targets and moderators of these effects were explored. METHODS: Men with APC (N = 192) were randomized (1:1) to 10-week tablet-delivered CBSM or HP, and followed for 1 year. Multilevel modeling was used to evaluate condition effects over time. RESULTS: Changes in HRQOL and symptom burden did not differ between groups. Men in both groups improved across several intervention targets; men in the CBSM condition reported greater increases in self-reported ability to relax, and both conditions showed improvements in cancer-related anxiety, cancer-related distress, and feelings of cohesiveness with other patients over time. Moderating factors included baseline interpersonal disruption, fatigue, and sexual functioning. CONCLUSIONS: Tablet-delivered CBSM and HP were well received by men with APC. The hypothesized effects of CBSM on HRQOL and symptom burden were not supported, though improvements in intervention targets were observed across conditions. Participants reported high-baseline HRQOL relative to cancer and general population norms, possibly limiting intervention effects. The identified moderating factors should be considered in the development and implementation of interventions targeting HRQOL and symptom burden.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many facets of life. We evaluated pandemic-related health care experiences, COVID-19 prevention behaviors and measures, health behaviors, and psychosocial outcomes among rural and urban cancer patients.Among 1,472 adult cancer patients, who visited Huntsman Cancer Institute in the past 4 years and completed a COVID-19 survey (August-September 2020), we assessed the impact of the pandemic on medical appointments, prevention/health behaviors, and psychosocial factors, stratified by urbanicity.Mean age was 61 years, with 52% female, 97% non-Hispanic White, and 27% were residing in rural areas. Rural versus urban patients were more likely to be older, not employed, uninsured, former/current smokers, consume alcohol, and have pandemic-related changes/cancellations in surgery appointments (all P.05). Changes/cancellations in other health care access (eg, doctor's visits) were also common, particularly among urban patients. Urban versus rural patients were more likely to socially distance, use masks and hand sanitizer, and experience changes in exercise habits and in their daily lives (all P.05). Less social interaction and financial stress were common among cancer patients but did not differ by urbanicity.These findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic had a substantial impact on cancer patients, with several challenges specific to rural patients. This comprehensive study provides unique insights into the first 6 months of COVID-19 pandemic-related experiences and continuity of care among rural and urban cancer patients predominantly from Utah. Further research is needed to better characterize the pandemic's short- and long-term effects on rural and urban cancer patients and appropriate interventions.

130 Background: The field of targeted radionuclide therapy (RNT) for prostate cancer (PC) is growing rapidly with recent FDA approval of the first lutetium-177-PSMA-ligand. Commonly used patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures were originally designed to assess the impacts of traditional therapies (e.g., chemotherapy, surgery). We aimed to develop the first PRO measure for PC patients receiving RNT. Methods: We used a multi-step approach based on input from experts and patients. We identified symptoms and toxicities potentially relevant in the context of RNT for PC from a literature review of published trials and interviews with PC patients who had received RNT, caregivers of RNT recipients, and clinicians. We identified items to include in the measure from the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) item library. Finally, we reviewed, refined, and finalized the new measure. Results: Potentially relevant symptoms/toxicities were identified by reviewing published trials (e.g., xerostomia, nausea). Interviews with PC patients who received RNT (n=29), caregivers (n=14), and clinicians (n=11) yielded additional symptoms/toxicities (e.g., fatigue, constipation). After selecting a broad and comprehensive list of items from the FACIT item library, we refined the list based on input from 9 experts in the field of RNTs and PROs from 5 institutions. Patients who received RNT for PC (n=11) reviewed the draft measure and confirmed items were relevant to RNT recipients and comprehensible. This resulted in a brief 15-item measure deemed by key stakeholders to be relevant and useful in the context of RNT for PC. Conclusions: The FACT-RNT (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – Radionuclide Therapy) is a PRO new measure for RNT recipients developed through multi-step collaboration with patients, caregivers, clinicians, and international experts. The FACT-RNT can be used in RNT clinical trials and real-world settings.

ImportancePatients with cancer typically have greater financial hardships and time costs than individuals without cancer. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated this, while posing substantial challenges to delivering cancer care and resulting in important changes in care-delivery models, including the rapid adoption of telehealth.ObjectiveTo estimate patient travel, time, and cost savings associated with telehealth for cancer care delivery.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsAn economic evaluation of cost savings from completed telehealth visits from April 1, 2020, to June 30, 2021, in a single-institution National Cancer Institute–Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. All patients aged 18 to 65 years who completed telehealth visits within the designated time frame and had a Florida mailing address documented in their electronic medical record were included in the study cohort. Data were analyzed from April 2020 to June 2021.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe main outcome was estimated patient cost savings from telehealth, which included 2 components: costs of travel (defined as roundtrip distance saved from car travel) and potential loss of productivity due to the medical visit (defined as loss of income from roundtrip travel plus loss of income from in-person clinic visits). Two different models with a combination of 2 different mileage rates ($0.56 and $0.82 per mile) and census tract–level median hourly wages were used.ResultsThe study included 25 496 telehealth visits with 11 688 patients. There were 4525 (3795 patients) new or established visits and 20 971 (10 049 patients) follow-up visits. Median (IQR) age was 55.0 (46.0-61.0) years among the telehealth visits, with 15 663 visits (61.4%) by women and 18 360 visits (72.0%) by non-Hispanic White patients. According to cost models, the estimated mean (SD) total cost savings ranged from $147.4 ($120.1) at $0.56/mile to $186.1 ($156.9) at $0.82/mile. For new or established visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit ranged from $176.6 ($136.3) at $0.56/mile to $222.8 ($177.4) at $0.82/mile, and for follow-up visits, the mean (SD) total cost savings per visit was $141.1 ($115.3) at $0.56/mile to $178.1 ($150.9) at $0.82/mile.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this economic evaluation, telehealth was associated with savings in patients time and travel costs, which may reduce the financial toxicity of cancer care. Expansion of telehealth oncology services may be an effective strategy to reduce the financial burden among patients with cancer.

This was a secondary analysis of a pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) among young adult (YA) survivors of cancer, which showed preliminary evidence for improving psychosocial outcomes. Secondary outcomes assessed were the feasibility of collecting biological data from YAs and preliminary effects of MBSR on markers of inflammation and cardiovascular function.Participants were randomized to 8-week MBSR or a waitlist control condition. Participants provided whole blood spot samples for analysis of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin (IL)-6 as well as blood pressure data in-person at baseline and 16-week follow-up. Feasibility was assessed with rates of providing biological data. Linear mixed effects modeling was used to evaluate preliminary effects of MBSR on inflammatory markers and blood pressure over time.Of 126 total participants enrolled, 77% provided biological data at baseline (n = 48/67 MBSR, n = 49/59 control). At 16 weeks, 97% of the 76 retained participants provided follow-up biological data (n = 34/35 MBSR, n = 40/41 control). Relative to the control group, MBSR was associated with decreased systolic blood pressure (p = 0.042, effect sizes (ES) = 0.45) and decreased diastolic blood pressure (p = 0.017, ES = 0.64). There were no changes in CRP or IL-6.This was the first study to explore the feasibility of collecting biological data from YA survivors of cancer and assess preliminary effects of MBSR on inflammatory and cardiovascular markers in an RCT. Minimally invasive biological data collection methods were feasible. Results provide preliminary evidence for the role of MBSR in improving cardiovascular outcomes in this population, and results should be replicated.

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic has drastically changed cancer care delivery strategies. Patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer (LA-HNC) may be particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, as they often undergo treatments that require daily clinic visits (e.g., radiation therapy). The goal of this study was to characterize the lived experience of LA-HNC patients and their healthcare providers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods LA-HNC patients who completed a full course of chemotherapy and radiation therapy during the COVID19 pandemic (N = 20) and LA-HNC healthcare providers (N = 13) participated in semi-structured interviews. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for qualitative themes. Results The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on patients’ overall quality of life and health care. Results were organized in four main themes: (1) increased psychological distress; (2) exacerbated social isolation; (3) added stress in clinic for patients and providers; and (4) delays in health care. Conclusions Findings highlight myriad ways LA-HNC patients and providers have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Results can inform the development of supportive interventions to assist LA-HNC in managing COVID-19-related stress and unmet needs related to social isolation and in-clinic support. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-021-06773-x.

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) is the gold-standard treatment for insomnia, which is common among breast cancer survivors (BCS). This pilot randomized controlled trial tested the first CBT-I intervention for Spanish-speaking BCS delivered using eHealth. Participants (N = 30) were Spanish-speaking BCS with insomnia symptoms recruited in Puerto Rico and randomized to a 6-week eHealth CBT-I group intervention or a waitlist control. Primary outcomes were acceptability (recruitment, treatment satisfaction) and feasibility (retention, attendance). Secondary outcomes were group differences in sleep outcomes post-treatment (i.e., insomnia symptoms, sleep disturbance, sleep efficiency). Recruitment (95%) and retention (97%) were excellent. All CBT-I participants (100%) attended ≥ 3 of 6 sessions. Satisfaction with CBT-I was acceptable. Post-intervention, there were medium to large group differences for average insomnia symptoms (d = 1.02), sleep disturbance (d = 1.25), and sleep efficiency (d = 0.77) favoring CBT-I. There were small/medium to medium/large group differences for the proportion of participants with clinically significant insomnia symptoms (d = 0.52), sleep disturbance (d = 0.67), and low sleep efficiency (d = 0.33) favoring CBT-I. Spanish-language eHealth CBT-I for BCS was acceptable and feasible and showed preliminary efficacy.ClinicalTrials.gov TRN: NCT04101526 (Posted September 24, 2019).

BACKGROUND: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy can lead to durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies. Immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) and cytokine release syndrome (CRS) are common and may place patients at risk for longer-term cognitive impairment. OBJECTIVE: This study examined changes in cognition in the first year after CD19-directed CAR-T-cell therapy for lymphoma, as well as CAR T-cell therapy-specific risk-factors (e.g., ICANS, CRS) and non-specific risk factors (e.g., baseline quality of life, frailty) for worsening cognition. STUDY DESIGN: Patients’ perceived cognition was assessed at baseline and at days 90 and 360. Clinical variables were abstracted from medical records. Piecewise mixed models were used to examine acute change (i.e., within 90 days) and longer-term change (i.e., from 90 days to 360 days) in cognition as well as to explore risk factors for worsening cognition. RESULTS: Among 118 participants (mean age 61, 59% male), mean levels of perceived cognition did not change from baseline to day 90 (p values>0.05) but worsened from day 90 to day 360 in global cognition and in the domains of memory, language, organization, and divided attention (p values0.05). Other putative risk factors were not associated with acute or longer-term changes in perceived cognition (p values>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: CAR T-cell therapy recipients reported delayed deterioration in several cognitive domains, although changes were small. These findings may be useful when educating future patients on what to expect when receiving CAR T-cell therapy.

BACKGROUND Rapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs). OBJECTIVE The aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs’ experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS This study was conducted at Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt), an NCI (National Cancer Institute)-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prior to COVID-19, Moffitt piloted telehealth visits on a limited basis. After COVID-19, Moffitt rapidly expanded telehealth visits. Telehealth visits included real-time videoconferencing between HPPs and patients and virtual check-ins (ie, brief communication with an HPP by telephone only). We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 oncology HPPs who implemented telehealth during COVID-19. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using Dedoose software (version 4.12). RESULTS Approximately half of the 40 participants were physicians (n=22, 55%), and one-quarter of the participants were advanced practice providers (n=10, 25%). Other participants included social workers (n=3, 8%), psychologists (n=2, 5%), dieticians (n=2, 5%), and a pharmacist (n=1, 3%). Five key themes were identified: (1) establishing and maintaining patient-HPP relationships, (2) coordinating care with other HPPs and informal caregivers, (3) adapting in-person assessments for telehealth, (4) developing workflows and allocating resources, and (5) future recommendations. Participants described innovative strategies for implementing telehealth, such as coordinating interdisciplinary visits with multiple HPPs and inviting informal caregivers (eg, spouse) to participate in telehealth visits. Health care workers discussed key challenges, such as workflow integration, lack of physical exam and biometric data, and overcoming the digital divide (eg, telehealth accessibility among patients with communication-related disabilities). Participants recommended policy advocacy to support telehealth (eg, medical licensure policies) and monitoring how telehealth affects patient outcomes and health care delivery. CONCLUSIONS To support telehealth growth, implementation strategies are needed to ensure that HPPs and patients have the tools necessary to effectively engage in telehealth. At the same time, cancer care organizations will need to engage in advocacy to ensure that policies are supportive of oncology telehealth and develop systems to monitor the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, health care quality, costs, and equity.

Background Rapid implementation of telehealth for cancer care during COVID-19 required innovative and adaptive solutions among oncology health care providers and professionals (HPPs). Objective The aim of this qualitative study was to explore oncology HPPs’ experiences with telehealth implementation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods This study was conducted at Moffitt Cancer Center (Moffitt), an NCI (National Cancer Institute)-Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. Prior to COVID-19, Moffitt piloted telehealth visits on a limited basis. After COVID-19, Moffitt rapidly expanded telehealth visits. Telehealth visits included real-time videoconferencing between HPPs and patients and virtual check-ins (ie, brief communication with an HPP by telephone only). We conducted semistructured interviews with 40 oncology HPPs who implemented telehealth during COVID-19. The interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed for themes using Dedoose software (version 4.12). Results Approximately half of the 40 participants were physicians (n=22, 55%), and one-quarter of the participants were advanced practice providers (n=10, 25%). Other participants included social workers (n=3, 8%), psychologists (n=2, 5%), dieticians (n=2, 5%), and a pharmacist (n=1, 3%). Five key themes were identified: (1) establishing and maintaining patient-HPP relationships, (2) coordinating care with other HPPs and informal caregivers, (3) adapting in-person assessments for telehealth, (4) developing workflows and allocating resources, and (5) future recommendations. Participants described innovative strategies for implementing telehealth, such as coordinating interdisciplinary visits with multiple HPPs and inviting informal caregivers (eg, spouse) to participate in telehealth visits. Health care workers discussed key challenges, such as workflow integration, lack of physical exam and biometric data, and overcoming the digital divide (eg, telehealth accessibility among patients with communication-related disabilities). Participants recommended policy advocacy to support telehealth (eg, medical licensure policies) and monitoring how telehealth affects patient outcomes and health care delivery. Conclusions To support telehealth growth, implementation strategies are needed to ensure that HPPs and patients have the tools necessary to effectively engage in telehealth. At the same time, cancer care organizations will need to engage in advocacy to ensure that policies are supportive of oncology telehealth and develop systems to monitor the impact of telehealth on patient outcomes, health care quality, costs, and equity.

Purpose: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) substantially improve survival for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), but fatigue associated with TKIs can negatively impact patients’ quality of life and adherence. This study sought to identify correlates of fatigue (e.g., sociodemographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, health behaviors) among patients with CML taking TKIs who reported moderate to severe fatigue. Methods: Adults with CML experiencing at least moderate fatigue were recruited for a pilot trial of a cognitive behavioral intervention to improve fatigue. Data collected pre-intervention were used to explore concurrent correlates of fatigue in univariate and multivariable models. Results: Participants (N = 44, 48% female) were M = 55.6 years old (SD = 12.6) and had been diagnosed with CML M = 5.2 years prior (SD = 5.3). Participants had been taking their current TKI for M = 2.5 years (SD = 2.7). Most participants (64%) had previously been treated with ≥ 1 other TKI. More than three-quarters of participants (77%) reported severe fatigue. In univariate models, worse fatigue was associated with higher BMI (r = -0.36, p = 0.018), prior treatment with other TKI(s) (r = − 0.34, p = 0.024), worse sleep disturbance (r = − 0.51, p < 0.001), and less physical activity (r = 0.31, p = 0.043). In a multivariable model, significant univariate correlates accounted for 39% of the variance in fatigue. Worse fatigue remained significantly correlated with higher BMI (β = − 0.33, p = 0.009) and more disturbed sleep (β = − 0.45, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Results may inform future research aiming to identify fatigued patients with CML at risk for experiencing more severe fatigue during TKI therapy. Identifying predictors of fatigue severity could aid clinicians in identifying which patients will benefit from referrals to supportive therapy. Trial registration: NCT02592447, October 30, 2015