Search

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening is underused, particularly among low-income and minoritized populations, for whom the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has challenged progress in achieving equity.MethodsA hub-and-spoke model was used. The hub was a nonacademic organization and the spokes were three community health center (CHC) systems overseeing numerous clinic sites. Via a cluster-randomized trial design, nine clinic sites were randomized to intervention and 16 clinic sites were randomized to usual care. Patient-level interventions included invitation letters, mailed fecal immunochemical tests (FITs), and call/text-based reminders. Year 1 intervention impact, which took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, was assessed as the proportion completing screening among individuals not up to date at baseline, which compared intervention and nonintervention clinics accounting for intraclinic cluster variation; confidence intervals (CIs) around differences not including 0 were interpreted as statistically significant.ResultsAmong 26,736 patients who met eligibility criteria, approximately 58% were female, 55% were Hispanic individuals, and 44% were Spanish speaking. The proportion completing screening was 11.5 percentage points (ppts) (95% CI, 6.1-16.9 ppts) higher in intervention versus usual care clinics. Variation in differences between intervention and usual care clinics was observed by sex (12.6 ppts [95% CI, 7.2-18.0 ppts] for females; 8.8 ppts [95% CI, 4.7-13.9 ppts] for males) and by racial and ethnic group (13.8 ppts [95% CI, 7.0-20.6 ppts] for Hispanic individuals; 13.0 ppts [95% CI, 3.6-22.4 ppts] for Asian individuals; 11.3 ppts [95% CI, 5.8-16.8 ppts] for non-Hispanic White individuals; 6.1 ppts [95% CI, 0.8-10.4 ppts] for Black individuals).ConclusionsA regional mailed FIT intervention was effective for increasing CRC screening rates across CHC systems serving diverse, low-income populations.

The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has dramatically impacted numerous health and economic fronts. Because of the stay-at-home mandate and practice of physical distancing, nearly all preventive care measures have been halted, including colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. The health consequences of this temporary suspension are of great concern, particularly for underserved populations, who experience substantial CRC-related disparities. In this commentary, we describe challenges and opportunities to deliver COVID-19-adapted CRC screening to medically underserved populations receiving care in community health centers (CHC). This perspective is based on key informant interviews with CHC medical directors, teleconference discussions, and strategic planning assessments. To address the unprecedented challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, we identify 2 broad calls to action: invest in CHCs now and support equitable and adaptable telehealth solutions now and in the future. We also recommend 4 CRC-specific calls to action: establish COVID-19-adapted best practices to implement mailed fecal immunochemical test programs, implement grassroots advocacy to identify community gastroenterologists who commit to performing colonoscopies for CHC patients, assess cancer prevention priorities among individuals in underserved communities, and assess regional CRC screening and follow-up barriers and solutions. The COVID-19 pandemic may further exacerbate existing CRC screening disparities in underserved individuals. This will likely lead to delayed diagnosis, a shift to later-stage disease, and increased CRC deaths. To prevent this from happening, we call for timely action and a commitment to address the current extraordinary CRC screening challenges for vulnerable populations.

ObjectiveYoung-onset colorectal cancer (YCRC) incidence is rising. Scant data exist on YCRC risk after presentation with concerning symptoms such as iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA) or haematochezia. We examined the association between IDA and YCRC, and haematochezia and YCRC.DesignCohort study of US Veterans aged 18-49 years receiving Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care 1999-2016. IDA analytic cohort was created matching individuals without incident IDA to those with IDA 4:1 based on sex, birth year and first VHA visit date (n=239 000). We used this approach to also create a distinct haematochezia analytic cohort (n=653 740). Incident YCRC was ascertained via linkage to cancer registry and/or cause-specific mortality data. We computed cumulative incidence, risk difference (RD) and HRs using Cox models in each cohort.ResultsFive-year YCRC cumulative incidence was 0.45% among individuals with IDA versus 0.05% without IDA (RD: 0.39%, 95% CI: 0.33%-0.46%), corresponding to an HR of 10.81 (95% CI: 8.15-14.33). Comparing IDA versus no IDA, RD was 0.78% for men (95% CI: 0.64%-0.92%) and 0.08% for women (95% CI: 0.03%-0.13%), and RD increased by age from 0.14% for

PurposeMinority race and lower socioeconomic status are associated with lower rates of opioid prescription and undertreatment of pain in multiple noncancer healthcare settings. It is not known whether these differences in opioid prescribing exist among patients undergoing cancer treatment.Methods and materialsThis observational cohort study involved 33,872 opioid-naive patients of age > 65 years undergoing definitive cancer treatment. We compared rates of new opioid prescriptions by race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status controlling for differences in baseline patient, cancer, and treatment factors. To evaluate downstream impacts of opioid prescribing and pain management, we also compared rates of persistent opioid use and pain-related emergency department (ED) visits.ResultsCompared with non-Hispanic White patients, the covariate-adjusted odds of receiving an opioid prescription were 24.9% (95% CI, 16.0 to 33.9, P < .001) lower for non-Hispanic Blacks, 115.0% (84.7 to 150.3, P < .001) higher for Asian-Pacific Islanders, and not statistically different for Hispanics (-1.0 to 14.0, P = .06). There was no significant association between race or ethnicity and persistent opioid use or pain-related ED visits. Patients living in a high-poverty area had higher odds (53.9% [25.4 to 88.8, P < .001]) of developing persistent use and having a pain-related ED visit (39.4% [16.4 to 66.9, P < .001]).ConclusionFor older patients with cancer, rates of opioid prescriptions and pain-related outcomes significantly differed by race and area-level poverty. Non-Hispanic Black patients were associated with a significantly decreased likelihood of receiving an opioid prescription. Patients from high-poverty areas were more likely to develop persistent opioid use and have a pain-related ED visit.

En Ecuador, el maíz (Zea mays, L.) representa uno de los productos agrícolas más importantes para la economía y la identidad nacional. Esta gramínea es atacada por diferentes organismos que provocan severos daños y afectan el rendimiento agrícola e industrial del cultivo. En el presente trabajo se presentan los resultados de una investigación documental basada en la búsqueda de información sobre aspectos de interés científico-técnico como la biología, daños y métodos para el control de las principales especies de insectos plaga del maíz en el campo.

BackgroundThe effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening with fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) of stool blood depends on high rates of colonoscopy follow-up for abnormal FITs and the use of high-quality tests. This study characterized colonoscopy referral and completion among patients with abnormal FITs and the types of FITs implemented in a sample of Southern California Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs).MethodsFQHCs in San Diego, Imperial, and Los Angeles Counties were invited to define a cohort of ≥150 consecutive patients with abnormal FITs in 2015-2016 and to provide data on sex, insurance status, diagnostic colonoscopy referrals and completion within 6 months of abnormal FITs, and the types (brands) of FITs implemented. The primary outcomes were the proportions with colonoscopy referrals and completion for all patients at each FQHC and in aggregate.ResultsEight FQHCs provided data for 1229 patients with abnormal FITs; 46% were male, and 20% were uninsured. Among patients with abnormal FITs, 89% (1091 of 1229; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.91) had a colonoscopy referral, and 44% (539 of 1229; 95% CI, 0.41-0.47) had colonoscopy completion. Across FQHCs, the range for colonoscopy referral was 73% to 96%, and the range for completion was 18% to 57%. Six of the 8 FQHCs (75%) reported FIT brands with limited data to support their effectiveness.ConclusionsIn a sample of Southern California FQHCs, diagnostic colonoscopy completion after abnormal FITs was substantially below the nationally recommended benchmark to achieve 80% completion, and the use of FIT brands with limited data to support their effectiveness was high. These findings suggest a need for policies and multilevel interventions to promote diagnostic colonoscopy among individuals with abnormal FITs and the use of higher quality FITs.

ObjectiveTo conduct an anatomic site-specific case-control study of candidate colorectal cancer (CRC) risk factors.DesignCase-control study of US veterans with >1 colonoscopy during 1999-2011. Cases had cancer registry-identified CRC at colonoscopy, while controls were CRC free at colonoscopy and within 3 years of colonoscopy. Primary outcome was CRC, stratified by anatomic site: proximal, distal, or rectal. Candidate risk factors included age, sex, race/ethnicity, body mass index, height, diabetes, smoking status, and aspirin exposure summarised by adjusted ORs and 95% CIs.Results21 744 CRC cases (n=7017 rectal; n=7039 distal; n=7688 proximal) and 612 646 controls were included. Males had significantly higher odds relative to females for rectal cancer (OR=2.84, 95% CI 2.25 to 3.58) than distal cancer (OR=1.84, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.24). Relative to whites, blacks had significantly lower rectal cancer odds (OR=0.88, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.95), but increased distal (OR=1.27, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.37) and proximal odds (OR=1.62, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.72). Diabetes prevalence was more strongly associated with proximal (OR=1.29, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.36) than distal (OR=1.15, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.22) or rectal cancer (OR=1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.19). Current smoking was more strongly associated with rectal cancer (OR=1.81, 95% CI 1.68 to 1.95) than proximal cancer (OR=1.53, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.65) or distal cancer (OR=1.46, 95% CI 1.35 to 1.57) compared with never smoking. Aspirin use was significantly more strongly associated with reduced rectal cancer odds (OR=0.71, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.76) than distal (OR=0.85, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.90) or proximal (OR=0.91, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.95).ConclusionCandidate CRC risk factor associations vary significantly by anatomic site. Accounting for site may enable better insights into CRC pathogenesis and cancer control strategies.

BackgroundFertility counseling before cancer treatment has been advocated by clinical guidelines, though little is known about its long-term impact on the unique reproductive concerns of female adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer survivors. The goal of this study was to measure the association between fertility counseling by fertility specialists before cancer treatment and subsequent reproductive concerns.MethodA cross-sectional analysis was performed among 747 AYA survivors aged 18-40 years who had been recruited from cancer registries and physician and advocacy group referrals between 2015 and 2017. Participants self-reported information on past fertility counseling at cancer diagnosis, cancer type and treatment, and current reproductive concerns, as measured using the multidimensional Reproductive Concerns After Cancer scale. Multivariable log-binomial regression models tested associations between fertility counseling and reproductive concerns.ResultsThe mean age of the cohort was 33.0 years (standard deviation, 5.1 years), and the mean period since diagnosis was 7.7 years (standard deviation, 5.0 years). Seventy-three percent of participants were white, and 24% were Hispanic. Fertility counseling was reported by 19% of survivors; moderate to high overall reproductive concerns were reported by 44% of participants. In adjusted analysis, fertility counseling was significantly associated with moderate to high reproductive concerns (risk ratio, 1.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.45) and not modified by exposure to fertility-threatening treatments (Pinteraction = .23).ConclusionA large proportion of AYA cancer survivors across cancer types and treatment exposures reported moderate to high reproductive concerns, suggesting that there is a need to address these cancer-specific reproductive health concerns after treatment. Higher concerns, even with counseling, suggests the need to improve the quality of fertility counseling throughout the cancer continuum.

PurposeCancer ascertainment using large-scale electronic health records is a challenge. Our aim was to propose and apply a structured approach for evaluating multiple candidate approaches for cancer ascertainment using colorectal cancer (CRC) ascertainment within the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) as a use case.MethodsThe proposed approach for evaluating cancer ascertainment strategies includes assessment of individual strategy performance, comparison of agreement across strategies, and review of discordant diagnoses. We applied this approach to compare three strategies for CRC ascertainment within the VA: administrative claims data consisting of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD9) diagnosis codes; the VA Central Cancer Registry (VACCR); and the newly accessible Oncology Domain, consisting of cases abstracted by local cancer registrars. The study sample consisted of 1,839,043 veterans with index colonoscopy performed from 1999 to 2014. Strategy-specific performance was estimated based on manual record review of 100 candidate CRC cases and 100 colonoscopy controls. Strategies were further compared using Cohen's κ and focused review of discordant CRC diagnoses.ResultsA total of 92,197 individuals met at least one CRC definition. All three strategies had high sensitivity and specificity for incident CRC. However, the ICD9-based strategy demonstrated poor positive predictive value (58%). VACCR and Oncology Domain had almost perfect agreement with each other (κ, 0.87) but only moderate agreement with ICD9-based diagnoses (κ, 0.51 and 0.57, respectively). Among discordant cases reviewed, 15% of ICD9-positive but VACCR- or Oncology Domain-negative cases had incident CRC.ConclusionEvaluating novel strategies for identifying cancer requires a structured approach, including validation against manual record review, agreement among candidate strategies, and focused review of discordant findings. Without careful assessment of ascertainment methods, analyses may be subject to bias and limited in clinical impact.

PurposeGiven the increasing number and diversity of cancer survivors in the USA and persistent racial/ethnic disparities in breast cancer care, we sought to examine the role of acculturation in adherence to recommended surgical treatment and survivorship care recommendations.MethodsStudy participants included 343 Mexican American women with stage I to III breast cancer who participated in the Ella Binational Breast Cancer Study and were treated at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, between March 2007 and June 2011. Participants completed a questionnaire measuring acculturation, and clinical and demographic variables were obtained from an institutional database. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to examine differences in surgical procedures received and adherence to long-term survivorship care by acculturation level.ResultsBilingual (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.85-4.02, P = .11) and English-dominant women (OR = 2.39; 95% CI = 1.02-5.61, P = .04) were more likely to receive breast-conserving surgery (versus mastectomy) than were Spanish-dominant women. Among all patients, adherence to surveillance mammography and clinic visits decreased over time; the decline in clinic visit adherence was statistically significant (P = .005). Although no statistically significant association was found between acculturation and adherence to long-term survivorship care, receipt of breast-conserving surgery (versus mastectomy) was significantly associated with higher adherence to surveillance mammograms.ConclusionAcculturation may play a role in decision-making about surgical management of breast cancer, and further studies with larger samples are needed to explore its role in adherence to survivorship care recommendations. Findings from this study may help identify patients requiring additional support while making decisions pertaining to their cancer treatment and survivorship care.

En Ecuador, el maíz (Zea mays, L.) es un alimento básico de gran importancia económica y social. Esta gramínea es atacada por diferentes patógenos que afectan el rendimiento agrícola e industrial del cultivo. En el presente trabajo se presentan los resultados de una investigación documental fundamentada en la búsqueda de información sobre aspectos de interés científicos y académicos como los organismos causales, sintomatología, dispersión y manejo de las principales enfermedades del maíz.

PurposeTo assess tumor subtype distribution and the relative contribution of clinical and sociodemographic factors on breast cancer survival between Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites (NHWs).MethodsWe analyzed data from the California Cancer Registry, which included 29,626 Hispanic and 99,862 NHW female invasive breast cancer cases diagnosed from 2004 to 2014. Logistic regression was used to assess ethnic differences in tumor subtype, and Cox proportional hazard modeling to assess differences in breast cancer survival.ResultsHispanics compared to NHWs had higher odds of having triple-negative (OR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.23-1.35) and HER2-overexpressing tumors (OR = 1.19; 95% CI 1.14-1.25 [HR-] and OR = 1.39; 95% CI 1.31-1.48 [HR+]). In adjusted models, Hispanic women had a higher risk of breast cancer mortality than NHW women (mortality rate ratio [MRR] = 1.24; 95% CI 1.19-1.28). Clinical factors accounted for most of the mortality difference (MRR = 1.05; 95% CI 1.01-1.09); however, neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES) and health insurance together accounted for all of the mortality difference (MRR = 1.01; 95% CI 0.97-1.05).ConclusionsAddressing SES disparities, including increasing access to health care, may be critical to overcoming poorer breast cancer outcomes in Hispanics.

BackgroundAlthough married cancer patients have more favorable survival than unmarried patients, reasons underlying this association are not fully understood. The authors evaluated the role of economic resources, including health insurance status and neighborhood socioeconomic status (nSES), in a large California cohort.MethodsFrom the California Cancer Registry, we identified 783,167 cancer patients (386,607 deaths) who were diagnosed during 2000 through 2009 with a first primary, invasive cancer of the 10 most common sites of cancer-related death for each sex and were followed through 2012. Age-stratified and stage-stratified Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for all-cause mortality associated with marital status, adjusted for cancer site, race/ethnicity, and treatment.ResultsCompared with married patients, unmarried patients had an elevated risk of mortality that was higher among males (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.26-1.29) than among females (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.18-1.20; Pinteraction < .001). Adjustment for insurance status and nSES reduced the marital status HRs to 1.22 for males and 1.15 for females. There was some evidence of synergistic effects of marital status, insurance, and nSES, with relatively higher risks observed for unmarried status among those who were under-insured and living in high nSES areas compared with those who were under-insured and living in low nSES areas (Pinteraction = 6.8 × 10(-9) among males and 8.2 × 10(-8) among females).ConclusionsThe worse survival of unmarried than married cancer patients appears to be minimally explained by differences in economic resources. Cancer 2016;122:1618-25. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

BackgroundIt has been observed that married cancer patients have lower mortality rates than unmarried patients, but data for different racial/ethnic groups are scarce. The authors examined the risk of overall mortality associated with marital status across racial/ethnic groups and sex in data from the California Cancer Registry.MethodsCalifornia Cancer Registry data for all first primary invasive cancers diagnosed from 2000 through 2009 for the 10 most common sites of cancer-related death for non-Hispanic whites (NHWs), blacks, Asians/Pacific Islanders (APIs), and Hispanics were used to estimate multivariable hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for marital status in relation to overall mortality by race/ethnicity and sex. The study cohort included 393,470 male and 389,697 female cancer patients and 204,007 and 182,600 deaths from all causes, respectively, through December 31, 2012.ResultsAll-cause mortality was higher in unmarried patients than in married patients, but there was significant variation by race/ethnicity. Adjusted HRs (95% CIs) ranged from 1.24 (95% CI, 1.23-1.26) in NHWs to 1.11 (95% CI, 1.07-1.15) in APIs among males and from 1.17 (95% CI, 1.15-1.18) in NHWs to 1.07 (95% CI, 1.04-1.11) in APIs among females. All-cause mortality associated with unmarried status compared with married status was higher in US-born API and Hispanic men and women relative to their foreign-born counterparts.ConclusionsFor patients who have the cancers that contribute most to mortality, being unmarried is associated with worse overall survival compared with being married, with up to 24% higher mortality among NHW males but only 6% higher mortality among foreign-born Hispanic and API females. Future research should pursue the identification of factors underlying these associations to inform targeted interventions for unmarried cancer patients. Cancer 2016;122:1570-8. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Familial breast and ovarian cancer prevalence was assessed among 1150 women of Mexican descent enrolled in a case-only, binational breast cancer study. Logistic regression was conducted to compare odds of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) to non-TNBC according to family history of breast and breast or ovarian cancer among 914 of these women. Prevalence of breast cancer family history in a first- and first- or second-degree relative was 13.1% and 24.1%, respectively; that for breast or ovarian cancer in a first-degree relative was 14.9%. After adjustment for age and country of residence, women with a first-degree relative with breast cancer were more likely to be diagnosed with TNBC than non-TNBC (OR=1.98; 95% CI, 1.26-3.11). The odds of TNBC compared to non-TNBC were 1.93 (95% CI, 1.26-2.97) for women with a first-degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer. There were non-significant stronger associations between family history and TNBC among women diagnosed at age

BackgroundWe compared the distribution of breast cancer reproductive and hormonal risk factors by level of acculturation and country of residence in women of Mexican descent.MethodsTo compare the distribution of breast cancer reproductive and hormonal risk factors by level of acculturation and country of residence in women of Mexican descent, taking into account level of education, we analyzed data on 581 Mexican and 620 Mexican American (MA) women with a history of invasive breast cancer from the Ella Binational Breast Cancer Study. An eight-item language-based acculturation measure was used to classify MA women. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test associations between language acculturation, country of residence, and reproductive and hormonal risk factors.ResultsAfter adjustment for age and education, compared to women residing in Mexico, English-dominant MAs were significantly more likely to have an earlier age at menarche (

BackgroundBlack patients with metastatic colorectal cancer have inferior survival compared to white patients. The purpose of this study was to examine disparity in specialist consultation and multimodality treatment and the impact that treatment inequality has on survival.MethodsWe identified 9935 non-Hispanic white and 1281 black patients with stage IV colorectal cancer aged 66 years and older from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database. Logistic regression models identified race-based differences in consultation rates and subsequent treatment with surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. Multivariable Cox regression models identified potential factors that explain race-based survival differences. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsBlack patients had lower rates of consultation with surgery, medical oncology, and radiation oncology. Among patients seen in consultation, black patients received less surgery directed at the primary tumor, liver- or lung-directed surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. Unadjusted survival analysis found a 15% higher chance of dying for black patients compared with white patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08 to 1.22; P < .001). Adjustment for patient, tumor, and demographic variables marginally reduced the risk of death (HR = 1.08; 95% CI = 1.01 to 1.15; P = .03). After adjustment for differences in treatment, the increased risk of death for black patients disappeared.ConclusionsOur study shows racial disparity in specialist consultation as well as subsequent treatment with multimodality therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer, and it suggests that inferior survival for black patients may stem from this treatment disparity. Further research into the underlying causes of this inequality will improve access to treatment and survival in metastatic colorectal cancer.